China Support Network News

2011-09-19T22:23:00.001+08:00

Starting the China Support Network:

Radio interview recalls activity of 1989

CSN's John Kusumi recalls starting to help China's democracy movement, in response to the Tiananmen massacre of June 4, 1989

What follows is an excerpt from a radio interview with John Kusumi (JPK), founder of the China Support Network. This was broadcast on Thursday, Sept. 1, 2011, on American Freedom Radio network, reaching about 20 radio stations across the United States.

Host: I'm your host, Truther Girl Sonia, and I'm here with John Kusumi, former independent U.S. presidential candidate, and founder of the China Support Network.

...I have a couple of questions for you - how is China different? I mean, obviously it's a communist country, but how does the Chinese political system work? -Economic system, too.

JPK: China, as we'll remember, the People's Republic was established by Chairman Mao in 1949, and that's by the Communist Party of China. Now, the Communist Party of China was sort of an off shoot, or it was basically encouraged or built up there, with aid from the Soviet Communist Party. In fact it was like modelled or patterned on the Soviet Communist Party.

So, the trouble in China is that what they have there is anything but freedom. It's the opposite. It is a one-party dictatorship. It's given to brutal totalitarianism. And in general, we can just say that leading China, at the top in the leadership, is: communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs.

I happened to be the same age as the college students who rose up in Tiananmen Square, and that was 1989 when they had the pro-democracy uprising. And then the Chinese army was sent in to clear out the approach routes to Tiananmen Square. About 3,000 people were killed. We're talking about civilians of Beijing, being killed off in a massacre by the Chinese government.

In China, the thing is that what they have is the Communist Party; and everything else is subordinate to that, which means that the army really is not the army of the state, it's the army of the party.

Certain things like the Constitution of China -- it will bend to the will of the Communist Party.

It's almost like if you tried to install a deity; a God. Something above all else. The Communist Party just tries to put itself in there as the top level entity. And anything else that you hear about -- the army, the Constitution -- it's the Party's army; the Party's Constitution.

China's state apparatus is there in name, but it's just a parallel thing. In other words, there's a structure of people like, let's say, in the Party who care about business and then there might be "The Ministry of Economic Development" where they supposedly care about business. And these two structures exist side-by-side, and someone from the Party works inside every office of that ministry. The ministry is really like a sock puppet; the Party is pulling the strings.

Host: Have you been there?

JPK: No, I haven't. I've studied it, and I began in 1989 at the time of the massacre -- this was an eye popping thing on television.
You know, when you watch a huge tragedy like maybe the earthquake in Haiti, or the tsunami in Asia, you know how people just want to help the cause. Well, Tiananmen Square was like that; it was a tragedy, the difference is that it was a man-made, not a natural tragedy, and to fight it it's a political fight, not just a matter of delivering some aid or something.

Anyway, there were top student leaders from the uprising who escaped out of China and came to the West. They arrived in Washington DC, where they met me -- I was working on the China Support Network, a response organization that was built up spontaneously from the sentiment that "We've got to help this cause."

Host: How did they know you were there?

JPK: I was plugged in. Somehow, there was a Chinese student group; I think it was graduate students at the University of Maryland. And they had been given the heads up that these dissidents from Beijing were coming to town. And so then I was on the phone with someone in the Maryland group, and they said, "I need your help."

So, I went there and a couple of other people - in fact, the China Support Network had, I think, four people in Washington for their first week.

We were a little bit like political handlers. In other words, when you have a political campaign, there needs to be handlers who arrange things. So, for their first time when they spoke at the National Press Club, guess who was the one who went down the street to rent out a room at the National Press Club? I did that. I was taking the phone calls; people were seeking the daybook, the schedule, and I had to arrange transportation and just everything of -- it was like a campaign swing through Washington DC, and the dissidents were the political stars at that time.

It was a popular cause at first. America was very sympathetic in those days; we had just finished the Reagan years; we were accustomed to being staunch anti-Communists; and nobody thought that we should sit still, or take it, or countenance -- you know, it was mass murder of civilians in China!

I happen to suspect, if they had killed off 3,000 baby boomers, that we would have a very different China policy. But the thing is that the student uprising was led by Generation X'ers, and basically that's the younger group that basically had no political voice at the time.

The administration of George Bush senior -- at the time, that was the U.S. executive branch under Bush, senior -- refused to meet with the dissidents as they arrived from China. You would think that the leader of the free world might want to talk to the pro-democracy forces of China, but no -- the administration was refusing to meet with those dissidents.

However, during that first week, we did arrange that the dissidents had lunch with the Republican National Committee, and they met the Senate Joint Leadership with Bob Dole and George Mitchell. So, there were Congressional faces who cared about the situation, or they wanted to meet with the dissidents, and there was plenty of news media attention.

Host: But the government itself would not show any support for them. But, that doesn't come as a big surprise to me, because China apparently has a lot of power economically over America, I mean, they hold--

JPK: Well *now* they do.

Host: Or, how was it back then? They probably had an alliance though, at high levels all along.

JPK: Well, of course there's a back story to all of this. But now, the thing is that in the 1980s, the US trade deficit with China was always less than $5 billion. It was maybe $2 billion, $3 billion; maybe topped out at $4 billion. It was tiny; a tiny trade deficit.

And now it's over a quarter of a trillion. So, the rise of our trade deficit with China has happened *afterwards*; *after* Tiananmen. Almost like as if it's a reward for bad behavior.

Host: Yes, that what it seems to me -- like this was probably the plan all along, was to have labor outsourced to the best place for cheap labor, which was China - Communist China. And help that government to get rich, or their certain corporations, their elites, while benefiting off basically the slave labor, meanwhile undermining our own economy here in North America and turning us into slaves as well.

I tend to think that they had this planned out -- I mean, they couldn't have really thought that it was going to bring prosperity to the middle class, to have some corporations doing what they're doing with the free trade in China. And so, it probably -- it didn't really matter if they killed their own people, because they had America's support, or the government, executive branch -- they had their support. So the government would just want to sweep it under the rug.

China revolution planning at weekend convention

2011-05-28T12:31:00.003+08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
CONTACT TANG BAIQIAO 718-840-7166 tbqfl64@hotmail.com

Chinese dissidents converge on New York
for revolutionary conference

A large meeting for an important matter

New York May 28, 2011

(China Support Network) -- This year, the world faces revolution in many places, beginning with the Middle East and North Africa. Facing unrest and strong winds of change, many despotic dictators are falling from power.

The world's largest autocratic regime is the one which has ruled and enslaved the Chinese people -- 1/5th of the world's population -- since 1949. A democratic revolution is needed in China more urgently than anywhere. It is time now to overthrow despotism and build a free and democratic China.

Fortunately, the Chinese public is awakening to the ugency and necessity for change. The Chinese youth movement, seeking change, has now called for a Jasmine revolution, to echo those of the Middle East and North Africa, which were also called Jasmine revolutions.

In the free world, overseas Chinese dissidents are meeting in New York this weekend to plot the course of the revolution and to address urgent questions such as how to effectively impel and encourage this revolution; and what objectives, strategies, tactics, and actions will be employed.

With these questions in the air, dissidents planned a two-day conference for May 28 and 29, 2011. The conference coincides with two anniversaries: The 100th anniversary of the 1911 revolution, and the 22nd anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown. Accordingly, they have named the conference to reflect democratic revolution from 1911 to the present.

The conference should serve as a forum and a venue for the exchange of views and ideas among China experts, democracy campaigners, and human rights advocates. Also, as word spreads about this gathering, it may serve as a point of encouragement to China's domestic populace. They are invited to join the great movement to bravely oppose the tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party.

Rebellions will be planned in open sessions, closed sessions, and sideline sessions, lunches, and dinners. Chinese dissidents with pre-existing "platform" (prominent, famous names) are already in town ahead of the sessions: Feng Congde, Yan Xiong, Tang Baiqiao, and Lianchao Han are among those already known for their lengthy track records in service to Chinese democracy.

Various other guests will include American writers Greg Autry and John Kusumi, filmmaker Bruce Kivo, and a delegation of Burmese dissidents who also seek freedom for their homeland, and who stand in solidarity with Chinese dissidents.

The weekend's conference will highlight and raise the issue of Chinese revolution, and aims ultimately to overthow the tyranny of the Chinese Communist Party and to establish a democratic republic in China -- a new addition to the free world.

Conference time: 9:00 am to 5:00 pm

Conference venue: Marco Laguardia Hotel, 137-07 Northern Blvd, Flushing, NYC

We salute all who will join the revolution, at this weekend's events or by other means!

# # #

Dissidents seek to derail the nomination of Gary Locke for U.S. ambassador

2011-05-12T12:11:00.000+08:00

Has Locke acted as an agent of persecution for Communist China?

By John Kusumi
NEW YORK | Thursday, May 12, 2011

(China Support Network) - An array of pro-democracy Chinese dissidents, Falun Gong practitioners, and rights groups are lodging vociferous objections to the nomination of Gary Locke for U.S. ambassador to China.

Locke, a Chinese-American, is a former governor of Washington state and currently the Commerce Secretary in the cabinet of U.S. President Barack Obama, who nominated Locke to replace outgoing ambassador Jon Huntsman.

The U.S. Senate is scheduled to hold hearings today on the question of whether to confirm Obama's nominee. Chinese dissidents say that Locke, with pro-CCP (Chinese Communist Party) leanings and business interests, is anti-Falun Gong and has severe black marks on his own human rights scorecard.

In fact, they have prepared a "bombshell" witness, available to the Committee, accusing Locke of "Complicity in Genocide." The story is detailed in litigation that has been filed demanding a criminal investigation of Gary Locke by the U.S. Justice Department.

U.S. Senators Lugar (R-IN) and Kerry (D-MA), who lead the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, have been alerted to this controversy by way of letters and pleadings in the case, copies of which were obtained by the China Support Network.

The 'bombshell' witness is renowned cancer researcher and Falun Gong practitioner Dr. Lotus King Weiss, also known as Dr. Tongwen Wang. She is the plaintiff in the mentioned litigation, and Chinese dissident Ning Ye is the attorney representing her.

Dr. Weiss is described as "a well established, nationally prominent life scientist." Her Ph.D in cell development and molecular biology was obtained from the University of Florida in 1992, her work took her to Harvard Medical School and the Benaroya Research Institute. Her credits include various awards and grants, and publication of her work in peer-reviewed outlets including Science, Journal of Biochemistry, Journal of Immunology, etc.

In 1997, Gary Locke became Governor of the state of Washington. In 1999, the Chinese government began to crack down forcibly against all practitioners of Falun Gong. That crackdown is a holocaust of genocidal persecution. The words of Jiang Zemin (former head of the Chinese Communist Party) in ordering the crackdown were, "ruin their reputation; make them financially bankrupt; and eliminate them physically."

In 2002, Weiss undertook research to investigate human immune system responses to the practice of Falun Gong -- research that would use the techniques of Western medicine to perhaps vindicate the reported health benefits of practicing Falun Gong and advance cancer research.

That year, the American Cancer Society awarded a grant of $1 million to Dr. Weiss' laboratory. She was the Principal Investigator at this lab, which was under the Benaroya Research Institute (BRI) and affiliated with the University of Washington in Seattle. Her laboratory also had funding from the National Institutes of Health.

While it may be politically sensitive, it is not a crime to research Falun Gong during a genocidal crackdown. In American society, there is no reason why such research should be stopped -- by someone working for then-Governor Gary Locke.

Any impetus to quash activity related to Falun Gong did not come from American society. As Chinese dissidents now raise complaints, they see the hand of the CCP, directing Gary Locke as their de facto agent to do the bidding of Jiang Zemin: "ruin their reputation; make them financially bankrupt; and eliminate them physically."

The affidavit of Dr. Weiss, in the case filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, directly accuses former Gov. Locke of complicity in genocide, and describes the shutdown of her laboratory in 2003, by saying:

"a representative was sent from Mr. Gary Locke's Office, who mysteriously met with Dr. Gerald Nepom behind the door, for two hours; immediately, Dr. Gerald Nepom completely changed his attitude towards my interest in continuing the projects on the health benefits of practicing Falun Dafa; he officially informed me that I was not allowed to talk about Falun Dafa in the research center, since 'it is too political'...Dr. Gerald Nepom finally decided to dismiss me from the BRI, informing me that my scientific research projects 'no longer conform to the mission of the BRI'"

In addition to working through Governor Gary Locke, it is evident that the CCP directly targeted Dr. Weiss for yet more Falun Gong persecution. This followed on the heels of her presentation at the Boston Future Science Forum in April, 2002. (URL: http://www.pureinsight.org/node/195 )

Her affidavit states,

"I became black-listed by the Chinese Communist Government, which started to threat[en] my parents in China, claiming to them, 'We know everything your daughter does in America' and ordered them to pressure me to stop practicing Falun Dafa."

The CCP authorities evidently got through to Weiss' former husband, using their propaganda to warn him about "Falun Gong, the evil cult" -- and this prompted her husband to divorce her and to remove their seven year old boy from her custody.

Also in her affidavit, "the Chinese Communist Government ordered my own family members to force me back to China." Her older brother, Jianxin Bao, "then went to Dr. Gerald Nepom and informed him that I 'found a nice position in China' and asked him to ship all of my research equipments to China." By April of 2005, Dr. Weiss was effectively homeless on the streets of New York.

Such persecution makes for a stark story. However, it is fair to ask questions such as, why did the CCP work through Governor Gary Locke? And, why did he assent to play the role that he did in the saga of Dr. Weiss? If this is not Falun Gong persecution, then can Locke offer another reason why Weiss' career was summarily crushed? Did he receive some payment or any quid-pro-quo from Communist China?

As an agent of persecution, if not the Communist Party, Gary Locke has clearly opened himself up to the present charge of complicity in genocide. Also, since Dr. Weiss operated on the frontiers of science, findings from her laboratory could directly impact the future of the entire life science field and the battle between humanity and diseases. Findings from her laboratory are now suppressed, and all of us may have suffered a loss from the career interference that Dr. Weiss suffered.

The entire Falun Gong community can rightly look upon this incident as a setback for Falun Gong. For that reason, the China Support Network is adding its voice into the mix here, calling for the Senate Foreign Relations Committee to postpone and delay approval of Gary Locke's prospective ambassadorship, pending the outcome of a full investigation.

Attorney Ning Ye is deeply suspicious of Gary Locke. In writing to the U.S. Senate, he said that he is "deeply concerned" about the Locke nomination as as "ominous development."

Less formally, he is even more alarmed. To the China Support Network, Ye called the Locke nomination a "lethally dangerous development," and said, "I really suspect that Mr. Locke has been PRC's 'sunken fish' on strategic level."

In his letter to the U.S. Senate, Ye allowed that the case of Dr. Weiss "may not be sufficient to prove [Locke's] affiliation to any potentially hostile foreign power," yet he continued, "however, it may implicate his value system and his bias and loyalty under an undue foreign influence. If his personal involvement in direct persecution against FLG [Falun Gong] practitioners here in the United States is proven true, we then have to question what is his real partisanship, loyalty and affiliation?"

In fact, Ning Ye may have an answer to a question asked above: Did Locke "receive some payment or any quid-pro-quo from Communist China?"

Writing to the Senate, Ye noted, "After Mr. Locke retired from the governor’s office, he was recruited to work as a partner with Davis Wright Tremaine (2005 to 2009)....handling the firm's China related business." This led Ye to ask even more pointed questions:

"Did he use any improper political influence right from his fresh departure from the Governor's office, to unethically help the Chinese Communist clients with Davis Wright Tremaine? --This nominee needs to fully disclose the complete laundry list of his actual, preexisting, potential, and prospective PRC and PRC related clients, and such clients obtained by Davis Wright Tremaine. He may also need to disclose whether or not he has received any direct or indirect profits, benefits, and interests from Davis Wright Tremaine after 2009, or such profits, benefits, and interests from the government agencies of the PRC, or any sort of clients with PRC background via Davis Wright Tremaine.

"The U.S. Congress, and the People of the United States may also be interested to learn of any change of profit margin of Davis Wright Tremaine before, during, and after Mr. Locke's merging his influence -- an intangible asset -- as an investment in that private firm."

It seems that Communist China placed business with Davis Wright Tremaine, and that this may have been quid pro quo; a chance for the CCP to scratch Locke's back after he had run the errand for them, against Falun Gong. In addition, as a trustee of the University of Washington, Locke voted in 2008 to approve a $6 million grant which was given to Dr. Gerald Nepom, the BRI researcher who terminated Dr. Weiss under pressure from the Governor's office. That looks like quid pro quo; a reward to Dr. Nepom for the harm done to Falun Gong research.

As Ye noted in his letter to the Senate, "Dr. Nepom had been Dr. Weiss' staunch supporter for Dr. Weiss' cutting-edge research project funded by NIH and the American Cancer Society, before Mr. Locke got himself involved."

# # #

Western powers 'Leaving the Jews in the gas chambers'

2011-04-23T22:47:00.002+08:00

Western powers
'Leaving the Jews in the gas chambers'

U.S. China policy remains an atrocity of its own

Prepared remarks for
Falun Gong rally, 4/23/2011
By John Kusumi

FLUSHING, NY (CSN) -- Greetings from the China Support Network. Today is an anniversary day for Falun Gong, the group of meditating qi gong practitioners with teachings that seem like a variety of Buddhism. Falun Gong arose in China at a time when China itself is a troubled place.

The evil men of the 20th century famously include Hitler, Stalin, and Mao. Chairman Mao Zedong began the regime that has ruled China with an iron fist ever since 1949. Of course, China has 5,000 years of non-Communist history prior to 1949, but most adults today came of age during the reign of Chairman Mao's Chinese Communist Party, the CCP.

The evil of the 20th century didn't end with Mao. Mao was succeeded by Deng Xiaoping and by Jiang Zemin.

Now it is the 21st century, and Falun Gong is still on the receiving end of evil!

Falun Gong is persecuted, but it also has "company on persecution row." Uighurs are persecuted, Mongols are persecuted, house church Christians are persecuted, bloggers are persecuted, journalists are persecuted, and lawyers are persecuted -- indeed, anyone who would stand up for justice is face to face with brutal oppression.

Pro-democracy political dissidents remain on the receiving end of evil. Now the Tiananmen generation is joined by the Jasmine generation in the prisons of Communist China. The famous artist Ai Weiwei has recently been taken into custody.

And we should note that Tibetans are once again on the receiving end of evil -- reports tell us that on Thursday April 21, Chinese authorities rounded up 300 Tibetan monks and killed two civilians who protested that action at Kirti monastery.

Our gathering today is to remember the beginning of the crackdown on Falun Gong. That crackdown remains the largest and deadliest one going. In fact, history will remember it as an ugly holocaust of persecution and genocide.

I believe also that history will remember the silence of Western leaders and news outlets. Through their policies of free trade with Communist China, they have continued to lavish rewards upon the communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs who oppress China. With their deliberate blind eye for this persecution, they have brought shame to a Western world that once vowed, "Never again" in the face of genocide.

Let me be clear. Their China policy is no better than "leaving the Jews in the gas chambers." Their China policy is one of moral cowardice, and reveals craven indifference to human suffering. Western China policy is akin to a crime against humanity of its very own.

Someone such as U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton ought to stop the Western complicity. Freedom will come to China, and the equivalent of the Gates of Auschwitz will be opened up. We will gain a better view of the points that I am making here.

The international human rights community was pleased by the opening of the International Criminal Court in 2002. The upshot of the ICC is to show that genocide has consequences. War crimes have consequences. And crimes against humanity have consequences.

Facing genocide, the Western world once vowed, "Never again." The ICC now provides a tool that can assist in fulfilling that vow. Western leaders should:

• face these facts;

• use that tool and any clatter that's necessary to ultimately:

• Stop this genocide!

This episode of history is disgraceful for China, and it is shameful for the West. Even while that is true, I like to end my speeches by saying:

Thank you for having me -- god bless China -- and god bless America! Thank you again!

Web Sites Under Attack

2011-03-01T14:17:00.002+08:00

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE, March 1, 2011
CONTACT PERSON: Tang Baiqaio, Chinese dissident / former "June 4" student leader

WEB PRESENCE OF CHINESE 'JASMINE' REVOLUTION UNDER ATTACK

March 1, 2011 (CSN News) -- Chinese dissidents are condemning new cyber attacks - interference from Beijing - and also apologizing to web users for the inconvenience as their pro-Jasmine web sites experience denial-of-service (DOS) attacks.

Online calls for a Middle East-style 'Jasmine' revolution in China first appeared at the web site Boxun.com. Over the weekend, Boxun announced that it would no longer disseminate Jasmine-related information, due to heavy-handed tactics deployed by the Chinese government against their servers, their staff, and family members of their staff.

Chinese dissidents promptly condemned the attacks against Boxun, and announced a federation of dissident websites that would carry Jasmine-related material.

Now, member websites of that federation are coming under attack, presumably from Beijing, and dissidents are denouncing the attacks, and asking for patience from the community - web users who would access that material.

The eight web sites of the federation, announced this weekend, are:

Jasmine on Facebook: facebook.com/chinarevolution
China Affairs: chinaaffairs.org
Huang Hua Gang magazine: huanghuagang.org
Fire of Liberty: fireofliberty.org
Wolfax: wolfax.com
Future China Forum: bbs.futurechinafourm.org
Chinese Human Rights: cnrights.com
China Support Network: chinasupport.net

At this writing, five of these sites are up-and-running, and a sixth is also working, but the front page (at wolfax.com) is not served until the user solves a 'captcha' puzzle. Future China Forum is down, and CNRights.com is returning a blank page.

Organizer Tang Baiqiao praised the enthusiastic response to date, and vowed that all obstacles will be overcome until a Chinese revolution successfully establishes democracy in that land.

# # #

The Dynamics of Jasmine

2011-02-27T10:26:00.003+08:00

The Dynamics of Jasmine

By John Kusumi 2011.2.27

At this time, it is not clear who were the originators of the first internet postings which called for a Chinese Jasmine Revolution. We cannot judge their stature; nor the rectitude of their intentions; nor even interview them to inquire about these matters, without knowing who they are.

But as a matter in general, there should logically be a world-wide impact stemming from the wave of people power sweeping away dictatorships in the Middle East.

During Egypt's uprising, there were fears that Tahrir Square would become a Tiananmen Square -- in other words, a bloodbath echoing that of 1989 in Beijing, when the military opened fire with live ammunition to take back the square from civilian pro-democracy demonstrators.

Chinese dissidents remember that time vividly, and they rightly leaned into watching the events in Egypt intently. Early feelings that "We've seen this movie before" changed into feelings of elation when the dictator fell. The army had not opened fire against the crowd of demonstrators! Tahrir Square escaped the fate of Tiananmen Square!

The Arab world had people who were beaten down and abused; and yet they had hope, plus new social media. Their country changed when they also overcame their fear about the dictatorship and the security forces.

The Arab world experienced a change. Instead of people being afraid of governments, suddenly the governments are afraid of people.

That is not a strictly Arab phenomenon, nor should it be. During this Jasmine time -- on the same day Mubarak left power in Egypt -- Governor Scott Walker of the U.S. state of Wisconsin threatened to call out the National Guard for use in the case of dissent in Wisconsin. He was introducing an unpopular rollback of the rights of labor unions.

The people of Wisconsin did not fear the National Guard. They stood up, and now America has more protestors in the streets than it has had in many years. Many labor unions have turned out their members to go to public rallies in all 50 states of the USA.

Similarly, the people of Beijing should not live in fear of Hu Jintao. Who elected him?

Jasmine

And so we come to the story of the efforts for a Chinese Jasmine Revolution. The first attempt was supposed to be Feb. 20, but the invitation only circulated on Feb. 19, which meant that very little time was allowed for the invitation to circulate. On Feb. 20, most Chinese had never heard of the calls for Jasmine gatherings.

It was absurd to promulgate an invitation with such short notice. It would have been wiser to announce a date with one, two, or three weeks to allow the word to get around, and to build up a sense of anticipation and suspense.

So the first Jasmine invitation was on short notice and with scant publicity. The publicity that it did receive was largely due to the government crackdown against it. The government was able to block the word Jasmine on the internet; and pre-emptively detain dissidents on Feb. 19; and increase police presence for Feb. 20. Also, some college students were warned to stay on campus.

The events of last weekend show how nervous the Chinese government is about any spread of the Jasmine Revolution into China. In previous weeks, they had blocked other search terms such as Egypt, Cairo, and Mubarak in their attempt to prevent Egyptian news from reaching China.

The government's over-reaction may have been ham-handed, but it was largely effective. While some tried to gather at the designated locations, the police presence inhibited any chanting or speech making.

The scene caused the more snarky journalists to pronounce dead any hopes of a Chinese Jasmine Revolution, but Chinese dissidents actually valued the occasion as a good start. "It's progress, and we're happy to have it," seems the logical dissident attitude.

Yes, it was progress. It yielded four new things: (1.) The name of the revolution. Prior to Tunisia's events, one might have expected a color revolution. Instead, it's a flower revolution. (2.) Plenty of publicity that reached mainstream news outlets and led to headlines like, 'Middle East domino effect reaches China.' The Chinese efforts gain a boost from the tie-in with the Middle East. (3.) A new government crackdown is keeping this matter in the headlines. (4.) The crackdown has over-reacted by kidnapping human rights lawyers and by charging other detainees with crimes. Therefore, the government side has taken prisoners, and the dissident side must demand the release of the Jasmine prisoners.

Jasmine is here to stay

The internet posters of Jasmine-for-China quickly issued a call to gather again this weekend, and to make these Jasmine gatherings a regular weekly occurrence. They simply updated their hashtag from #cn220 to #cn227, where 227 means Feb. 27.

This time the gatherings have advance notice, and a week of publicity in the run up. There has been time for endorsements to come from pro-democracy groups of Hong Kong and Taiwan, and from Chinese dissident quarters both domestic and international.

In addition, there is the dynamic seen in Item #4, above. We are reminded about how the Tibetan uprising started in 2008.

Every March 10 is Tibetan uprising day, the anniversary of the 1959 occasion which caused the Dalai Lama to go into exile.

But, the uprising in 2008 is known as the 3.14 incident. Why the discrepancy?

Tibetan monks went out to have their usual commemoration of March 10. On that day, the Chinese authorities arrested or detained some monks. Therefore, it was incumbent upon the Tibetan monks to go out again on March 11 to say, "Release our prisoners! Give us our men back!" At that demonstration, more monks were detained or arrested. So, it was incumbent upon the Tibetan monks to go out again on March 12 and say, "Release our prisoners! Give us our men back!" At that demonstration, more monks were detained or arrested. That led to more of the same on March 13. Violence on March 14 only broke out after the Chinese government had been squeezing them incrementally harder for the prior four days.

Right now, Jasmine has the same dynamic. The Chinese government has taken prisoners, and it is incumbent upon the human rights community to demand their release. This week, the Jasmine protestors have more to protest than they did last week. And any new ham-handed abuses of this week will compound into the grievances of next week.

A lot of Chinese dissidents may have been caught unaware, when internet calls for Jasmine popped up on Feb. 19. The calls were promulgated anonymously, and not under the names of long standing groups.

Some people would have felt better, or more confidence, if the call said it was from "The Wei Jingsheng Foundation, the Overseas Chinese Democracy Coaltion, the Federation for Democracy in China, the China Democracy Party (various branches), the China Peace and Democracy Federation, the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements, the Party for Freedom and Democracy in China, Initiatives for China, the Tiananmen Mothers, and the signers of Charter 08."

That's a list of groups, and one could add Beijing Spring, the Free China Movement, the Tiananmen Generation Association, the IFCSS (Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars), the LRF (Laogai Research Foundation), and the CIG (China Interim Government).

But really, the overseas dissidents in exile have not had enough unity to put all of their names on one call. [Note: Tiananmen Mothers and Charter 08 are domestic, not exile groups.] The above is an interesting signature list, but it seems unlikely that we will see them all together on the same page, except here.

It no longer matters where the call came from, originally. Jasmine is happening, and the situation draws into it every human rights group that would call for the release of the Jasmine prisoners / detainees. It is fully predictable that even the U.S. State Department must call for the release of those dissidents, and soon we will hear Congressmen on the floor of the House of Representatives calling for their release.

While the original call for Jasmine was anonymous, it drew the response from the Chinese goverment, and then the imprimatur of all the news wires, newspapers, and media organizations that began to report it.

As a result, the Jasmine period in world history sees "people power" standing up against governments world-wide, whether we speak of the Middle East, or China, or the United States.

In fact, there is a Jasmine uprising happening in Iraq, the place where the United States invaded and installed the current government. People power may sweep away the puppet government of Iraq, but that is a profound humiliation for the United States, which thought that it was the occupying power!

Perhaps Jasmine entails a domino effect for dictators; and for the United States, it represents "the emperor's wardrobe malfunction."

In earlier writing for the China Support Network, I have previously called for Hillary Clinton to resign as the U.S. Secretary of State.

At this time, the China Support Network demands that Beijing:

- Stop the Jasmine crackdown;
- Release the Jasmine detainees, and all prisoners of conscience;
- Lift all restrictions on dissidents, allow the exiles to return to China;
- Meet the demands of Charter 08;
- Meet the demands of the Tiananmen Mothers.

The above five demands are intended for a reasonable Chinese government. In the alternative, if the government will not be reasonable, then we have only one demand:

- Hu Jintao, step down!

Internal movement controversy

2002 and 2003 was the winter of discontent for Chinese dissidents. Bill Clinton had started unquestioned free trade with China, and network TV news anchors in the U.S. had basically "turned off the microphone" for Chinese dissidents. September 11, 2001 was a fresh memory, and the War On Terror overshadowed all else in mainstream news.

Those were times when the China Support Network was almost the only place where one could turn for news and information of the Chinese democracy movement and human rights abuses in China. Because no one else covered this news beat, the China Support Network (CSN) was very vigorous about publishing any and all relevant news that we could find in English.

Imagine a time with no Twitter, no Facebook, no YouTube, and no Epoch Times (Dajiyuan). Capitol Hill legislative aide Joel Segal praised the CSN, saying, "If it weren't for CSN updates, I wouldn't know what was going on."

Things changed in 2004. The Epoch Times launched its English edition. They had more sources, a larger staff, and they were deeply plugged in to the Falun Gong.

As the Epoch Times began to become "the newspaper of record" for human rights and Chinese dissent, the CSN dialed down to a slower pace of publishing. We have been happy that the Epoch Times is on the scene and covering the news beat of Chinese dissent.

There have been times when the Epoch Times raised an eyebrow on my part. For example, they provided a lot of coverage when disgruntled constituents began to demonize and villify John Liu, a New York politician. I never completely understood the basis of the campaign against Liu.

(Is he a politician that's not listening to the people? 308 million people might say, "Welcome to America." However, unless there is election fraud, then he is duly elected to do his job as he sees fit. To be inattentive, or even to take a different side in a controversy, is not a crime in America.)

For one internal movement controversy, I clearly take the side of the Epoch Times. In 2006, they reported about forced organ harvesting, with just-in-time executions for Falun Gong practitioners who became the unwilling sources of organs removed for profitable transplant surgery.

The Kilgour-Matas report was a study that was later released. It was absolutely impeccable, from towering figures in the Canadian human rights community. Based on careful research and investigation, it concluded that yes, indeed, this crime of organ harvesting was indeed happening in China. And subsequent to its release, even more evidence appeared to corroborate the claim.

Prior to its release, Chinese dissident Harry Wu had expressed his skepticism about organ harvesting at the Sujiatan facility where it was first reported. That skepticism, together with a cursory inspection by the U.S. State Department, became the basis for the mainstream media to write off these reports as discredited.

I knew that (a.) three weeks had passed between the initial report and the show tour that was given to the U.S. State Department. There was plenty of time for the Chinese government to remove evidence from Sujiatan. And (b.) plenty of sources away from Sujiatan were providing evidence that the practice was occuring at dozens of other sites in China.

The mainstream media chose to err on the side against the Epoch Times and the Falun Gong practitioners who cried foul. That also means they erred on the side of believing communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs, while the latter committed systemic murder that will be remembered as crimes against humanity.

I have no doubt that history will reveal that the Epoch Times was right, and the mainstream media was wrong. (And, there is a death toll associated with the media silence on this matter.)

It was very dismaying that Harry Wu chose to very quickly condemn the reporting, before the Kilgour-Matas report was even released. In fact, because his own Laogai Research Foundation was documenting other cases of prisoner organ harvesting, it would have been smarter for Wu to "make hey" out of this story. It could have brought to light more of his own research about China's Laogai.

This was dismaying, and I don't know whether there has ever been a meeting of the minds that heals the rift between Falun Gong and Harry Wu. For the China Support Network, we stood with the Epoch Times and still do so. Organ harvesting remains a strong story and a hideous atrocity of the Communist Party, comparable to Nazi medical experiments that were performed on unwilling prisoners in World War II.

But now, a new matter has dismayed me -- in its English edition, a headline says, 'Jasmine Revolution in China a Trap, Say Analysts.'

I believe that assessment is premature, unhelpful, and moot. The article under your hands presents 'The Dynamics of Jasmine.'

Such a large number -- a wide array -- of dissident groups have been drawn in that, as noted above, "It no longer matters where the call came from, originally." Even on the short notice for Feb. 20, sympathy protests broke out in Hong Kong and New York. Endorsements or echoing or retweeting have come from many quarters, even the former ruling party in Taiwan, the DPP.

This means that, regardless of where the first call came from, many many people are "all in" for having a Middle East-style Jasmine Revolution in China. As this matter escalates, the Epoch Times must either come around, or else begin to appear like the odd man out.

As a matter of editorial judgment, I believe the China Support Network called it correctly when we supported the organ harvesting story. And at this time now, I believe that we are correct to be in alignment with those dissidents who are calling for a Jasmine Revolution to occur in China, now.

Before there was an English Epoch Times (ET), the China Support Network was "the newsletter of record" for Chinese democracy. If ET is falling off the wagon, then that will prompt the CSN to increase its own publishing pace, to continue our best efforts of keeping the story straight for Chinese democracy.

Perhaps the Epoch Times should issue an editorial to clarify where it stands.

# # #

More calls for Jasmine protests in China

2011-02-23T23:42:00.003+08:00

(Repost:) While the Jasmine Revolution is making its way to China, the following open letter, ostensibly from the still-anonymous organizers, has been translated into English and republished by Human Rights In China.

[Note: Elsewhere we have seen an internet posting that urges Beijingers to go to Tiananmen Square, and that expanded the list to 18 cities across China, and the days to include both Saturday and Sunday. The message below is closer to the earlier calls, naming McDonalds in Beijing, 13 cities across China, and protests to occur on Sundays.]

Open Letter to the National People’s Congress
from the Organizers of the Chinese Jasmine Rallies

[English Translation by Human Rights in China]

First, we would like to thank every participant of the Jasmine Rallies. Your participation has already made the authoritarian government very nervous. Your presence has made the Chinese government understand that they must choose between these two paths:

The Chinese government will genuinely fight corruption and accept the supervision of the people.

Suppress popular protest, continue corruption, and continue to refuse the supervision of the people.

Every Chinese person with dreams hopes that China will become prosperous, rich, and powerful, that the people will not have to worry about food and clothing, that the government is upright and honest, and that the judiciary is impartial and just. But twenty years have passed [since the 1989 Democracy Movement], and what we are witnessing is a government that grows more corrupt by the day, government officials who collude with vested interests, and a citizenry that has not benefitted from the reform, opening up, and economic development. On the contrary, the people have to endure high goods and housing prices, and do not have health care, education, or benefits for the elderly. And what about ten years from now? Will we face a government even more corrupt? A judicial system even more opaque? Will vested interests give up their vested interest?

Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: So much public housing has been sold to individuals, so many state-owned enterprises and so much land have been sold, and nearly all state-owned property has been sold off. But where has all the money from these sales gone? It goes without saying that state-owned property belongs to the entire people. But what did the people get? Led by an authoritarian regime, the opaque process of privatization has made a small number of people rich, but what did the vast number of ordinary people get?

Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: When Japan, Korea, and Taiwan were in the process of industrializing, they were able to make the overwhelming majority of their people prosperous. Why is it that during China’s industrialization the ordinary people are becoming poorer? Why is it that in just the last few decades China has gone from being a country with the smallest gap between the rich and the poor to one with the largest? It is because the unfair system has made a small number of people incredibly wealthy, and the vast majority of people remain poor.

Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: Every year the government uses public money to eat and drink, buy cars, visit foreign places, and raise salaries for officials; yet it doesn’t have money to spend on health care, education, benefits for the elderly, or other basic needs. The vast majority of Chinese people do not have basic health care, education, or benefits for the elderly. Not to mention Europe, America, Japan, or Korea; our welfare system is far behind those of India, Russia, or Brazil. When other countries use the majority of their tax money for the welfare of their people, where does our tax money go?

Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: At present the renminbi ranks first among world currencies in terms of quantity in circulation. This serious “over-issuing” of currency has brought about a vicious cycle of inflation inside China. The excessive printing of currency is recklessly diluting the value of the people’s wealth. Because the renminbi is not an international currency, it is China’s ordinary citizens who are out of luck. The meager income of China’s ordinary people must support goods and housing prices similar to those in Europe and America. On the one hand the government excessively prints money, and on the other hand it uses administrative means to keep housing prices low is this some sort of mockery?

Every good and honest Chinese person, please think: It is a matter of course that officials, when disclosing their wealth, should accept the supervision of the people, and that the government, when publishing details of tax revenues, should accept the supervision of the people. However, the Chinese people have no such power. We have been waiting for decades. Even if we wait for another ten years, we will not be able to get this kind of power. Should we keep on waiting? Are you willing to wait another 10 years, 20 years, 30 years?

In short, without pressure from the people, absolutely no authoritarian government would take the initiative to respect the people or accept the people’s supervision. What we need to do now is to put pressure on the Chinese ruling party. If the party does not conscientiously fight corruption and accept the supervision of the people, then will it please exit the stage of history. We call upon each Chinese person who has a dream for China to bravely come out to take an afternoon stroll at two o’clock on Sundays to look around. Each person who joins in will make it clear to the Chinese ruling party that if it does not fight corruption, if the government does not accept their supervision, the Chinese people will not have the patience to wait any longer.

We do not necessarily have to overthrow the current government. As long as the government fights corruption, the government and officials accept the people’s supervision, the government is sincere about solving the problems regarding judicial independence and freedom of expression and gives a timetable, we can give the ruling party time to solve the problems. We can call a stop to the strolling activities. We have been waiting for decades, if the government is sincere about solving the problem, we do not mind waiting a little longer. However, if the government is not sincere about solving the problems, but only wants to censor the Internet and block information to suppress the protests, the protests will only get stronger. As more and more people find out about “jasmine rallies,” there will definitely be more and more Chinese people joining in.

We don’t care if we implement a one party system, a two party system, or even a three party system; but we are resolute in asking the government and the officials to accept the supervision of ordinary Chinese people, and we must have an independent judiciary. This is our fundamental demand.

We do not support violent revolution; we continue to support non-violent non-cooperation. We invite every participant to stroll, watch, or even just pretend to pass by. As long as you are present, the authoritarian government will be shaking with fear.

China belongs to every Chinese person, not to any political party. China’s future will be decided by every person. We ask that the government and officials accept the supervision of the people, that the details of tax collection be published, and that taxes are genuinely "collected from the people, and used for the people." These basic requests are not the least bit excessive. For our country’s future, for the fundamental rights of our children and future generations, please bravely come out. The Chinese people’s thirst for freedom and democracy is unstoppable (as Wen Jiabao said during an interview on CNN).

If you are unable to participate in the strolls, please tell every Chinese person near you: We need an upright and honest government. We need the right to supervise government tax collection. We need the right to scrutinize officials’ wealth. We need the right to publicly criticize the government. These are the fundamental rights of every Chinese person. Please tell every Chinese person near you: Non-violent non-cooperation is the only path for Chinese democratization. Please use word-of-mouth to break through the news blackout and come show your support.

The Chinese people rely on themselves to fight for their rights. We should not even dream that an authoritarian regime would take the initiative to award us these rights. Please join us in non-violent non-cooperation to make the Chinese government respect the basic rights of the Chinese people.

Time: Every Sunday starting on February 20, 2011 at 2 pm. (If the Chinese government is sincere about solving problems such as corruption and public supervision, we will send out a notice stopping the action.)

Rally Locations:

Beijing: in front of the McDonald’s on Wangfujing Street

Shanghai: in front of Peace Cinema at People’s Square

Tianjin: below the Drum Tower

Nanjing, (Jiangsu Province): the entrance of Silk Street Department Store at the Drum Tower Square

Xi’an, (Shaanxi Province): the entrance of Carrefour on Beida Street

Chengdu, (Sichuan Province): under the Statue of Chairman Mao at Tianfu Square

Changsha, (Hunan Province): the entrance of Xindaxin Building at Wuyi Square

Hangzhou, (Zhejiang Province): the entrance of Hangzhou Department Store at Wulin Square

Guangzhou, (Guangdong Province): in front of the Starbucks at the People’s Park

Shenyang, (Liaoning Province): in front of the KFC at North Nanjing Street

Changchun, (Jilin Province): in front of Corogo Supermarket at Democratic Avenue of West Culture Square

Harbin, (Heilongjiang Province): in front of Harbin Cinema

Wuhan, (Hubei Province): in front of the McDonald’s at Jiefang Avenue and the World Trade Plaza

People who are in cities not listed here, please go to the central square of your city.

We ask websites to help spread this statement, thank you!

One of the organizers of China Jasmine Rallies (Posted on Boxun by a friend on February 21, 2011.)

Liberate Libya, Bahrain, China +

2011-02-21T17:03:00.001+08:00

A call to liberate Libya, Bahrain,
China, and Mainstream journalism!

By John Kusumi

February 20, 2011 (Sunday) was not a slow news day. Uprisings and/or crackdowns were reported in Bahrain, Libya, China, Djibouti, Morocco, and Madison, Wisconsin. There may still be protest/uprising action happening in Algeria, Iran, and Yemen, but it didn't cross my desk Sunday. I did notice that sympathy protests happened in Hong Kong and New York.

Libya

Libya must be liberated. Even by Washington standards, this is an easy call. Everybody should lean into giving the full measure of their support to the pro-democracy dissidents who are trying to change Libya for the better. They want to get out from under their despotic tyrant, Moammar Gadhafi.

Recent days have included the news of protest/uprising action and the brutal, deadly crackdown that the tyrant meted out in reply. To me, however, the kicker is this headline:

"Libyan security forces open fire on mourners at funeral for anti-gov't protesters in Benghazi again."

Think of that! In Libya, they can't mourn their dead. They can't go to a funeral, because government thugs are there to mow down any bereaved friends and relatives who have the temerity to think that their deceased loved one deserves recognition.

This is inhuman by any standard. Now reiterating my point, Libya must be liberated.

With my point already made, it remains to note that Sunday's action in Benghazi, Libya was more than a crackdown: it was a massacre. The following tweet, seen Sunday, was poignant and should pull at anyone's heart strings:

"Massacre in Benghazi, Gaddafi is using missiles, killing libyans, help us, help us, help us "

Once again, this is inhuman by any standard.

A group of the Chinese democracy movement, 'Coalition for Citizens Rights' plans to hold a sympathy protest for Libya, condemning that massacre, outside the United Nations (in New York) on Tuesday at 2p.m. (The China Support Network will co-sponsor. All are welcome. It's at the Dag Hamarskjold Park location: 47th St./1st Av.)

Bahrain

Bahrain had its own massacre two days earlier. It filled the hospitals to overflowing, according to the voice of a Dr. Ghassan at Salmaniya Hospital, as heard in this clip from Al Jazeera: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eaYvy8CPxwU

Once again, this is inhuman by any standard. That's not the end of it. Today on Facebook, there appeared a message which says:

"I'm a 16 year old teanager.. We live in fear and pain in bahrain
Our peaceful protest of more than 50,000 if not more got attacked at
night by the bahrain army..
70 people have been missing.. No one knows about them but one
was found brutaly killed and cut into pieces
Also women and children went missing
There was over 600 casualties and 8 martyrs..
The minister of health is covering it up, and not allowing to send
ambulances.. And even if sent it isn't allow to help people
Instead they get beaten up
Its a msacre wats happening here.. The bahrain media wants to have
a media blockout.. 14 reporters r still at the airport..
Also.. The bahrain tv r spreading wrong facts.. And covering up the
masacre and creating plays
I wish you could help us because we really do need help.."

There is something else to say about Bahrain and U.S. foreign policy. Rumors say that the Saudis are ready to dispatch troops "to help" the regime in Bahrain. Frankly, that would never happen unless it was green lighted from Washington, DC. If the Saudis move into Bahrain, that will be as proxies. It's really Washington moving into Bahrain, but letting the dirty work be done by Saudis, who are a puppet state of Washington.

Is the United States, via proxy, about to stomp into Bahrain to further harm these injured people?

As a human rights group, the China Support Network calls upon Obama, Biden, and Clinton to refrain from any assistance to the Bahrain regime and indeed to veto any Saudi move to back up that regime. With fresh blood on its hands, the Bahrain regime has crimes against humanity for which it must answer.

Once again, this is inhuman by any standard. The al-Khalifa ruling family must go. Bahrain must overcome its tyranny. Freedom is the order of the day, and as mentioned in the headline, this is a call to liberate Bahrain.

If the Obama group actually reads this tract, I would repeat words from a former CIA analyst: "Globalisation and improved communications now make possible what once was easily silenced. If regimes are to survive, they must draw a new contract with their peoples."

In light of that, you [Obama folks] might want to dial back or dial down on your own crimes against humanity. Take that as a tip from a human rights group and member of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court. Together with the ICC, the China Support Network frowns on genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

China

Speaking of genocide and crimes against humanity, let's talk about Communist China. The revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt have certainly encouraged hope in the community of Chinese dissidents, and illuminated a way in which people power (plus online connectivity) was able to organize in the face of a tyrant; overcame fear; and was victorious in 18 days without a Tiananmen-style massacre perpetrated by the army.

This is absolutely a pattern and model for Chinese dissidents to follow. Over the weekend just now, some dissidents indeed tried to follow just that formula.

The efforts to organize a Jasmine Revolution for China are the subject of conflicting reports. This first appeared either ten days ago, or else Thursday Feb. 17, depending upon the news source you read. In any case, on Saturday Feb. 19, organizers released a very specific plan for Feb. 20.

The plan named 13 Chinese cities and gathering places, directed participants to appear at 2p.m. on Sunday, and to shout specific slogans, namely: "We want food, we want work, we want housing, we want fairness, we want justice, start political reform, end one-party dictatorship, bring in freedom of the press, long live freedom, long live democracy."

This was bold on the part of dissidents, but the regime was swift in its pre-emptive suppression. Indeed, much is learned from the Chinese government's over-reaction.

A synopsis by Bloomberg News said, "The Chinese authorities responded by arresting some human rights lawyers, shutting university students in their campuses, banning the use of keywords on mobile phone messages and with an overwhelming security presence, according to reports in foreign media.

"Television footage yesterday showed police clashing with small numbers of demonstrators in Beijing and Shanghai, with several protesters struggling as they were bundled away into custody."

The Bloomberg synopsis doesn't do justice to this story, but here at the China Support Network, we'll fill in some more.

They swooped in with a pre-emptive dragnet. Some dissidents were taken away; others were kept under house arrest. The total receiving such treatment exceeded 100, according to the Hong Kong Information Center for Human Rights and Democracy. In still other cases, dissidents were warned against attending, or questioned about it.

The word "jasmine" was blocked by internet filters. Service was suspended in Beijing for multi-recipient text messages, according to the AP. Reports say that a heavy police presence cordoned off the 13 protest sites.

Twitter users and the activist Wan Yanhai also reported that university students were told to stay on campuses and away from trouble.

With all of the above as prelude, Sunday's protests were sparsely attended and anti-climactic. Activity was reported in Beijing and Shanghai, but in the other cities the police presence seemed the only response to the internet calls, which used these hashtags:

#cn220, #jasmine, #freeChina, #cnJasmine

Sympathy protests broke out in Hong Kong and New York. How to take this news, and analysis thereof, can be debated. My group, the China Support Network, did not organize these protests, but we declare solidarity with China's Jasmine Revolution. We call for the liberation of mainland China from its Communist Party oppressors.

Furthermore, we demand the release of all of the Jasmine detainees who were rounded up in the pre-emptive sweep. This echoes the same demand that was made at the Hong Kong protest on Sunday.

The hardline dissident group, China Interim Government, is demanding that Chinese president Hu Jintao step down. China Support Network declares its solidarity and repeats the call: Hu Jintao, step down!

How to spin the news can always be debated. I've noticed that the snarkiest journalists are the fastest ones to file their stories. We don't yet have large crowds marching in the streets, and for that some journalists are already writing off China's Jasmine Revolution. Who's side are they on? Clearly, they are on one side of the battle, and it is the anti-democracy side.

There is a cautionary tale to be told about Richard Spencer of the UK Telegraph. On Jan. 16, his headline said, "Tunisia: Why the Jasmine Revolution won't bloom."

His subheadline said, "Friday's coup in Tunisia sent shockwaves throughout the Arab world. But don't expect it to herald an era of democratic reform."

Spencer said that "It is easy to laugh now," because Tunisian dictator Ben Ali had predicted the demise of Hosni Mubarak, and now instead of Mubarak it was Ben Ali who had just been driven out of power.

We could ask the question, "Who is laughing now?" Is it Ben Ali who has egg on his face, or is it Richard Spencer, who reported with near-metaphysical certitude that the Jasmine Revolution would not spread to Egypt?

My cautionary tale reveals that "the Jasmine Revolution" has been written off as dead before; but, simply because a journalist files such a story does not mean that the story will stick. Journalists should think long and hard before trying to pronounce the demise, or the end, of the Chinese pro-democracy movement.

This movement has people who are "still here" from 1989. The China Support Network was a response group to the atrocity at Tiananmen Square.

Tiananmen Square student leader Wang Dan remains on the scene. Interviewed in Taiwan, he can spin this story like a pro. (Perhaps, with over 20 years' experience in the field, we should allow that he is a pro.)

His interview published by Taiwan's CNA news wire allowed that the revolution did not materialize on Sunday. But, Wang is quoted saying, "The Chinese Communists were indeed frightened this time... Why does a government, which has more information than its people do, believe more than its people that mass protests are likely in China these days?"

He assessed Sunday's campaign as "a very successful 'test and drill' for the future gathering of 'true people power.'"

Writing in the Australian, Leo Lewis said that some people "hailed the day's activities as a useful dry run and suggested that protesters should meet every Sunday."

The New York Times found a Beijinger named Cui, who said that he was not disappointed by the outcome:

"He predicted that many people, emboldened by the fact that an impromptu gathering had coalesced at all, would use social networking technology to stage similar events in the future.

"'It's very difficult to do this in China, but this is a good start,' he said. 'I'm thankful to be able to participate in this moment in history.'"

Mainstream journalism

Above, I wrote a cautionary tale with the example of Richard Spencer, who didn't expect to see a post-Mubarak world when he filed his story on Jan. 16. Journalists can be caught out by their near-metaphysical certitude that received wisdom and outdated rules of thumb can never fail them.

Today, Melissa K. Chan was heedless of my cautionary tale. With her feet on the desk, she tapped out an article titled, "Call me if there's a revolution." She explained that her friend, another journalist, was headed out to central Beijing, but she decided not to go. "Pretty certain nothing would happen," she explained, she didn't want "a waste of my Sunday afternoon."

If that isn't bad enough, within her article Ms. Chan proceeds to telegraph her attitude. An entire section begins, "Here's why I think China won't be having a revolution anytime soon." She then proceeds to regurgitate some hackneyed cliches of received wisdom, faulty rules of thumb, and flawed interpretation of history.

I believe that Al-Jazeera should recall or reassign Ms. Chan, or that she should recuse herself from any future reporting on the Chinese democracy movement.

It is exceedingly clear, in advance of future pro-democracy coverage, that Ms. Chan is biased against the movement. Her absence is not to be missed. For all I care, she can stay in a nail salon for the duration of the revolution. In between pedicures, perhaps she can try some more of her feet-on-the-desk journalism.

When I consider the Melissa Chans of the news world, I wonder, "How much does the Communist Party pay you to ignore the human rights abuse of the Chinese democracy movement? Is that amount more, or less, than what they pay you to ignore the human rights abuse of the Falun Gong on a weekly basis?"

There is a Beiijing Foreign Correspondents' Club, and all of them ignore the human rights abuse of the Falun Gong on a weekly basis. If the long arc of history bends toward justice, then at some point they will be exposed for being tacitly complicit, and silent accessories to the crimes against humanity that have been committed by the Chinese Communist Party in twelve years of the Falun Gong crackdown.

Are they journalists? Or are they press release rewrite analysts? In order to report from Beijing and preserve their access in the Beijing power structure, they have made a pact with the devil. Sold out and soulless, they have abdicated a fuller version of journalism. They have kept Western audiences in the dark about the full extent and scale of the genocide against Falun Gong.

They have served their Communist masters in Beijing. (And the home office overseas never thinks to ask after the Falun Gong.) But they have not served the right side of history, nor the public's right to know. What is the final epithet that I can write in this space? Perhaps I will let them choose from two alterate endings. They may be "filthy sub-human scum." Or they may be "paragons of moral cowardice and trite reporting."

Either way, there is something profoundly foul at the Beijing Foreign Correspondents' Club, and I wouldn't want to be them; nor within smelling distance of that abominable hell hole. I would challenge them simply to tell me: What is the current death toll in the Falun Gong crackdown? And how many people died while you were withholding that number from the public?

If the revolution succeeds, we will soon learn the answers to these interesting questions.

# # #

China Policy Ossified, Wishful, Ruinous

2011-01-15T08:28:00.002+08:00

By John Kusumi and Ning Ye
Jan. 14, 2011

As Barack Obama prepares to welcome Hu Jintao to a White House state dinner, Zbigniew Brzezinski launched a message offensive to frame U.S.-China relations. Regrettably, the policy prescriptions are flawed, faulty, and wishful rather than realistic. They were of arguable merit in the 1970s (the decade when the policy began); they overlook geopolitical changes in the 30 years since then; and in the twenty-teen decade, they are fully divorced from reality.

During forty recent years, U.S.-China policy can be summarized by five words: getting cozy with Communist China. It is against our better interests; it is economically ruinous; and by building up a nuclear-armed, communist superpower, it directly threatens the U.S.' own national security. It is a risky scheme to have a hasty rush to Maoism.

Where does this policy come from? In large part, it comes from Zbigniew Brzezinski. He was the National Security Advisor to former U.S. President Jimmy Carter. During that term of office, the U.S. threw Taiwan under the bus and normalized relations with Beijing.

Writing in the New York Times on January 2, Brzezinski waxed nostalgic about former dictator Deng Xiaoping's historic trip more than 30 years ago, as Deng visited the Carter administration to begin collecting China's winnings. It is as though China held a winning lottery ticket. Brzezinski notes that it "marked the beginning of China's three-decades-long economic transformation – one facilitated by its new diplomatic ties to the United States."

Brzezinski's policy advice is old wine in an old bottle. It is as though nothing has changed since November 1969, when the Cohen memo reached the desk of former U.S. President Richard Nixon and hatched the idea of getting cozy with Communist China. Because actual policy then moved in the direction suggested by Jerome Cohen's memo, subsequent pronouncements have all been oriented to reinforce and defend the indefensible policy.

The issue now is that China has risen to being the world's number two superpower, from being the poorest one among the Communist ranks 40 years ago, when U.S. policy made its strategic U-turn to enable the "younger nephew" to fight against the "big brother."

It is always fair to note that the Communist Party is not China – and, China is not the Communist Party. U.S. policymakers have chosen to be cozy with China's government, but not with the wider aspirations of its people, best expressed in its pro-democracy, labor, and religious movements such as Falun Gong. Therefore we are really discussing U.S.-CCP relations, because the CCP is the one party, dictatorial government that stands in for China while victimizing its people, suppressing these movements, and enabling diabolical corruption.

Lip service notwithstanding, the appeasement policy of recent decades has bet against popular aspirations and against the emergence of Chinese democracy. Certainly, the U.S. would be better served with a hedging strategy. What if the CCP is on the wrong side of history? Will the U.S. be remembered for aiding and abetting some of history's worst oppressors?

If we look at policy outcomes on the ground, that's what we're doing: The U.S. is aiding and abetting some of history's worst oppressors. If we include its victims under Chairman Mao, the CCP has killed 80 million Chinese people, in addition to approximately 58,000 U.S. soldiers in the battlefields of Korea. Adding to the death toll, the brutal Falun Gong crackdown (still in progress) may be larger than the Tiananmen crackdown, the Uighur crackdown, and the Tibetan crackdown combined. For the CCP, crimes against humanity are business as usual.

In the worst case, U.S. policy is now analogous to that of Neville Chamberlain, the British prime minister of the 1930s who refused to believe the worst of Nazi Germany. Unwilling to treat the Nazi threat as the strategic, lethal adversary that it was, Chamberlain followed policies of appeasement and began to sound like Baghdad Bob, in denial of the actual military situation on the ground. It took a different British prime minister, Winston Churchill, to have a clear eyed view and to exhibit strength against Nazi Germany.

Brzezinski argues for continued, Chamberlain-esque appeasement with complete disregard to a completely changed geopolitical landscape more than 40 years after the Cohen memo. Naturally since the policy is his brainchild, he defends it with this old wine in an old bottle.

In Brzezinski's time as National Security Advisor, this policy weakened the Soviet bloc. But in the decades since then, changes of circumstance now indicate that this policy is weakening the free world.

Absent the Soviet Union, U.S.-China relations have been of, by, and for business, even while the balance of payments has tipped heavily in favor of China and against the U.S. economy. U.S. rhetoric about liberty and rights has been hollow window dressing. The stale policy benefits two groups and hurts two others. The benefit has been for U.S. and CCP elites. The harm has been for U.S. and Chinese laobaixing (a term that means "ordinary citizens").

Brzezinski has failed to justify why the U.S. should be out of step with liberty, itself. He can no longer fall back on the Soviet Union to justify the appeasement of Communist China.

Many Chinese are themselves astonished at the winning lottery ticket that was handed to the CCP in the 1970s. Chinese dissident Wei Jingsheng has celebrated the emergence of the Tea Party in U.S. politics. If there is any hope, however slim, that America will move in a different direction, that is to be welcomed.

It is to be admitted that Zbigniew Brzezinski had his day. But now, it is time for the U.S. to dial back on its provision of aid and comfort to a nuclear armed, communist superpower.

John Kusumi is President of the China Support Network. Ning Ye is a Chinese dissident and attorney.

CSN Demands Media Apology

2010-12-08T23:32:00.000+08:00

Right on schedule, here is our Op-Ed on the eve of
Liu Xiaobo's Nobel Peace Prize

By John Kusumi, CSN President

December 8, 2010 (CSN) -- This week has the world-notable occasion of the Nobel Peace Prize being awarded to Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo.

The entire Chinese democracy movement should be demanding an apology of Western policy makers and media Managing Editors.

This Op-Ed could be submitted to the mainstream 'news' outlets, but we already know how those outlets have been with CSN and with the Chinese dissidents for the past decade. I have described the relationship between U.S. media and U.S. politicians as the corrupt, flacking for the corrupt.

Legacy news media are on the ropes, and desperately need a 'reset moment.' That, for more reasons than just the Chinese democracy movement. (The current Wikileaks episode reveals both the corruption and the flacking, which serves to validate that my observation holds true, even in matters away from the Free China cause. Meanwhile on national leadership, the U.S. President has painted himself into a corner and the media has climbed ever further out on a limb.)

The China Support Network can say to the MSM: We don't believe in you any more. There is more to be expected of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy than from the high and mighty figures who (mis) manage their narratives in the public discourse, while posing as "objective journalists."

The tragic and bloody massacre at Tiananmen Square of 1989 -- ordered by China's government, conducted by the army -- tore at the heart strings of the public and policy makers alike, while inspiring other freedom fighters such as those in Eastern Europe (where the Berlin Wall came down later in 1989). Chinese students could feel short changed because they pushed and yet it was East Germans who got freedom that year.

Did the news media report the massacre? Yes, definitely. In fact, they had coverage of the inspiring, student-led uprising for seven weeks before that massacre. Because the uprising was that lengthy, there was lots of time for word to reach the West, and for all talking heads of the news media to digest and analyze the movement. Television coverage was so riveting that Pew Research reported 45% of Americans were "closely following" the political turmoil in China.

When the army killed some 3,000 people and finally reached the square, this jaw dropping atrocity was a tragedy on television. Similar to Asia's tsunami, or Hurricane Katrina, or Haiti's earthquake -- tragedies motivate the kind hearted to respond. My fellow Americans and I launched the China Support Network. Soon, we were working shoulder-to-shoulder with leading Chinese dissidents.

Think tanks, and the Senate Joint Leadership, and the Republican National Committee all reached out to the newly-exiled dissidents. One, Wu'er Kaixi, was mobbed by women. The China Support Network co-managed his first week in Washington, along with other dissidents. And when news reporters wanted the daybook, or scheduling requests, they called the China Support Network, as a "go-to" organization. I know these stories because I personally accompanied Wu'er Kaixi; I wrote releases, alerts, and advisories; and I fielded those phone calls with media requests. In that week, we got the ear of former Senators Bob Dole and George Mitchell, but not the U.S. President and executive branch.

In fact, the Chinese dissidents had a presence in the news media throughout the 1990s. America's Managing Editors have played a trick. "Now you see them, now you don't" is the trick specifically. One decade the democracy movement had a voice; and the next decade, there was no voice for the pro-democracy people; the true heroes of freedom and human rights.

The 2000s were a time of stories getting squashed. A time of the media's blind eye for human rights abuse. Even while China ramped up its Falun Gong crackdown and added new ones: the Tibetan crackdown of 2008, and the Uighur crackdown of 2009. Squashed stories include dissident opposition to the PNTR free trade deal between the U.S. and China; all word of the Falun Gong crackdown that is still going today; and, the hideous story that China uses Falun Gong prisoners as the unwilling source for organ harvesting and transplant surgery.

Oh, was this supposed to be an Op-Ed about Liu Xiaobo? --Well, in a way, it is. This is an Op-Ed about what became of his cause. This is an Op-Ed about the cause of freedom, democracy, and human rights -- and, how it is received in the U.S. news media.

It is as though U.S. Managing Editors have a message for Chinese people: Death for you is fine by them.

World War, Korean War, or Close Shave?

2010-11-26T17:58:00.001+08:00

Notes written from the brink of war

By John Kusumi

Wars can easily start from miscalculation, and as I look at the Korean peninsula, I believe that somebody miscalculated.

News brings word of two matters- - (a.) On November 23, 2010, North and South Korea had an exchange of artillery fire. Who fired first is immaterial, but a South Korean military official said, "We were conducting usual military drills and our test shots were aimed toward the west, not the north." Irrespective of that detail, North Korea took it upon themselves to shell the South Korean island of Yeonpyeong, killing at least two civilians and two military personnel. It is also believed that South Korea returned fire.

As reported in Australian news (ABC News),

"According to North Korean media the country's leader Kim Jong-il visited the artillery base which attacked the South just hours before this week's shelling started.

"The report said he was accompanied by his son and heir Kim Jong-un.

"If true, it would suggest that orders for the artillery attack came right from the top.

"Even if not true, the report shows that North Korea's propaganda machine is placing the country's leader and his son at the front line and in command."

ABC News also reported the number of shells: 50 fired by the North, 80 fired by the South. And, it indicated that the North is demanding a redraw of the maritime border between the two nations.

--On Tuesday evening, Chinese dissidents were speculating that there is political maneuvering in the North. Yet, let's continue onwards to the second news item- - (b.) On November 24, 2010, it was publicized that the U.S. Pentagon / Obama administration is sending the USS George Washington, a Navy aircraft carrier, to join wargames with South Korea in the Yellow Sea (which is west of the Korean peninsula and coastal for China), with its arrival and commencement of exercises slated for Sunday, November 28.

It may be an immaterial factoid to note that the exercises were pre-planned, in the pipeline prior to the island shelling incident, and that the exercises are due to end Wednesday, December 1. Factoids aside, it very much appears that the U.S. is flexing its muscle in the region. Whether welcome or not, those are the optics at hand. On Sunday, the aircraft carrier will be the hardware at hand. And by Wednesday, the "exercises" will have outcomes at hand.

What can be said is, "Welcome to the brink of war." And, welcome to advice from the pro-democracy China Support Network, a very "Generation X*" group (*also known in China as the Tiananmen generation).

At my CSN group, we are on the public record having zero tolerance for communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs. When I think of the governmental regimes of China and North Korea, I think, "A pox on both of their houses." At this time, it is worth reviewing some prior advocacy.

2003: Just say no to North Korea

In 2003, "Just say no to North Korea" was an article jointly authored by Tiananmen dissident Zhou Yongjun and myself. At this time, my co-author is unavailable -- he's in a Chinese jail, serving his third term as a political prisoner. For a one line digression, the CSN demands that Communist China immediately release Zhou Yongjun, along with other high-profile prisoners Liu Xiaobo, Gao Zhisheng, and Wang Bingzhang.

2006: Treachery will get you nowhere

Publishing in 2006, I wrote that "were I George W. Bush, I might now be enunciating five words for Kim Jong Il: 'Treachery will get you nowhere.' If any offers were on the table for North Korea, it is time to take those offers off the table." My 2006 advice included the words, "The imperative for freedom knows no exceptions. Efforts for freedom in Asia need to be more than just speeches and lip service."

2006: Asian dictatorships are a bad thing, and we should oppose them

My bottom line said, "We need a consistent policy about Asian dictatorships. Asian dictatorships are a bad thing, and we should oppose them!"

2006: North Korea must be liberated

We should oppose Asian dictatorships, and at the China Support Network, our narrative carries exactly that tune. My 2006 advice to the Bush administration was accompanied by another article from D.J. McGuire. His title? "North Korea must be liberated."

1989 - present: China must be liberated

It is worth remembering the point and purpose of the China Support Network. While we do not advocate violence, we do advocate liberation: freedom, democracy, and human rights for mainland China. In addition to being pro-democracy, we are anti-communist human rights campaigners. We make common cause with the dissidents from those lands where a Communist Party still rules: China, North Korea, Vietnam, Laos. Together with Cuba, they are the remaining Communist lands. In each case, the regime is a brutal, totalitarian dictatorship.

2003: National security angles unmasked

The Chinese democracy movement was very visible around the time of 1989's Tiananmen Square massacre - an occasion when Chinese college students had led an uprising for democracy, and Beijing used its army and live ammunition to storm and retake Tiananmen Square from peaceful, unarmed demonstrators. That brutal crackdown was on world TV at the time, and there is an iconic photograph of one lone man, stopping a line of tanks, that was one of the 20th century's most sensational moments captured on film. The Tiananmen crackdown was a hideous turn of history, by the hand of evil, and then it was swept under the rug by the George H. Bush administration (and then the Clinton administration, and then the George W. Bush administration).

The China Support Network was a popular cause when it began, but we can understandably feel "swept under the rug" along with the balance of the Chinese democracy movement.

When you are swept under the rug by the U.S. establishment, you get to see what else they are keeping hidden under the rug. With all of the friendliness that U.S. administrations have extended to Communist China in the past 20 years, items "swept under the rug" include U.S. national security and America's spine with communism. In 2003, CSN republished an article by the Chinese dissident Fang Jue. It comes from Harvard University's Fairbank Center for East Asian Research. Here is an overview of what "the news" has downplayed:

- In Northeast Asia: China is the main (if not sole) supporter of North Korea. China props up the North Korea regime to create a strategic front in Northeast Asia to tie up the forces of America and its allies.

- In the Taiwan Strait: China's military threatens Taiwan. This not only cows independence-minded Taiwanese, but also weakens American prestige in Asia. When tension grows in the Taiwan Strait, China uses this as a bargaining chip to persuade America to concede on other issues.

- In Southeast Asia: China's military encroaches upon disputed islands in the South China Sea in order to punish countries who would align themselves too closely with America. In Southeast Asia China also supports the military dictatorship in Burma. It thus uses aggression to create "allies" or buffers in Southeast Asia that will help it oppose democracy and the West.

- In South Asia: China supports the Pakistan military dictatorship in developing its nuclear and missile programs. The purpose is to encourage Pakistan to distance itself from the West and use Pakistan as a buffer against India, whose success with democracy creates a growing regional competition to China.

- In Central Asia: The new Shanghai Cooperation Organization, a consortium of China, Russia, and other former Soviet republics, wields influence to counterbalance the interests of democratic countries.

- In the Middle East: China supports theocracy and missile development in Iran and proliferates sensitive technology and goods through aid to Syria and Libya. China also supported Iraq's former dictatorship over a long period of time.

- In Russia: China and Russia cooperate to restrain America from playing too large of a leading role in the world. This cooperation serves mutually to bolster the influence of Russia and China in the international community.

We can thank the dissident Fang Jue for his research paper. Notably, he concludes that American leaders have been missing "an unprecedented historical opportunity to end communism and totalitarianism after the Cold War." He advocates a "global strategy to transform China into democracy." When America gets with the program, it will pressure Communist China until it is communist no more.

Let's return now to 2010...

Welcome back to the brink of war. For the record, as the CSN has advocated pressure on Asia's communist regimes, we did not advocate a hot, shooting war. What we had in mind was more of a Cold War II. Communist China can and should be treated in likewise manner as Ronald Reagan treated the Soviet Union. Arguably, Beijing has been following a path that suggests they are already in Cold War II, because of the behaviors noted above in the section, "National security angles unmasked."

But now, it's necessary to consider the present potential of a hot, shooting war. Make no mistake: the DMZ (demilitarized zone) between North and South Korea is a dividing line. It is the boundary between the free world, on the one hand, and the world of tyranny, on the other hand. That boundary should logically cleve (and hence obviate) the paradigm of globalization. This is where we must choose to stand with the free world and not be snookered by the world of tyranny, led by the CCP (Chinese Communist Party).

Newbies, if reading this, may question why bring China into this, when the combatants on Tuesday were North and South Korea. The answer is that China already is in this. North Korea may be called a client state, or a puppet state, of Communist China. As noted by Fang Jue above, "China is the main (if not sole) supporter of North Korea. China props up the North Korea regime..." Behind the scenes of North Korea, there is China. And for that matter, we can note that South Korea is a client state of the US. Behind the scenes of South Korea, there is the US defense establishment.

Informed sources are saying the same. From D.J. McGuire, "There's almost no way a move like this wouldn't get green-lighted by the CCP." The Epoch Times (ET) cited Chinese and Taiwanese analysts as indicating that Beijing is pulling strings from behind the scenes. Under their headline, "Attack on South Korea an Elaborate Ploy, Analysts Say," they note that, "A senior media person from Taiwan by the last name Zeng told The Epoch Times in a phone interview, he believes this provocative attack was a deceptive act jointly deployed by the Chinese and North Korean regimes." ET also quoted Sun Yanjun, a China affairs expert and former professor at Beijing Normal University, saying:

"From my view of the relationship between China, North Korea, and South Korea, the regimes in China and North Korea are military partners, so it is very unlikely that this move came from the motive of North Korea alone.

"The regimes in China and North Korea are currently going through very hard times; they have no other cards to play. They must maintain this tension so they can bargain with the international community.

"The regime in China is currently under a lot of international pressure, including the exchange rate issue and also various internal pressures. It is looking for a way out, to divert the internal conflicts and international pressure.

"The recent Diaoyu Island issue [with Japan] is also an attempt of looking for a way out. But the regimes in China and North Korea are not ready for a war, especially China is not ready."

The speculation of the analysts is summed up in the Epoch Times' subheadline: Chinese and North Korean regimes seek to blackmail United States into concessions. The opening paragraph of this article included my view that somebody miscalculated. It wasn't the American side, and CCP tyrants may have expected an America that blinks and accomodates, rather than hangs tough.

The news thus far tells that the US is hanging tough, and it is likely to remain in that posture because, as noted, it's the border of the free world and the stakes include the credibility of US military alliances.

It may complicate matters that the new South Korean president is a militaristic hot head. At the same time, he knows the stakes -- the streets of Seoul -- better than we do.

I kid you not that we are at the brink of war. Yes, in fact, matters have come to this. We will now sort out three possible paths that events may take: World War, Korean War, and Close Shave.

World War

A World War is now unlikely, because China would have to go it alone. The Obama administration has been on a charm offensive to "reset" its relationship with Russia, and has peeled Russia away from the SCO (Shanghai Cooperation Organization) military alliance with China. And, Obama recently went on a trip to Asia that was another charm offensive with such places as India and Indonesia. They have their own reasons to be wary of China, and they will not be joining China for the enlargement of a World War.

Governments around the world have been unanimous in condemning North Korea for Tuesday's shelling. That includes Russia. Only China, in its state media, has refrained from condemning North Korea. As noted above, North Korea has no other friend but China. A geopolitical strategy has already isolated and encircled these two "friends."

I conclude that a World War is not happening, but in some calculations, war on the Korean peninsula can still widen into a U.S.-China war. Those who know the history of the Korean War in the 1950s know that the Communist Chinese sent reinforcements to North Korea -- and that there was direct combat between troops of the U.S. and China.

However, a repeat of this scenario is unlikely. One could recall that the U.S. won the arms race with the Soviet Union, and in recent years we have turned our military "up to 11." If there's an arms race with China -- we've already won that. China is the smaller military power.

Korean War

It appears that if they want one, they can have it. We are about to "get up in their face" with an aircraft carrier, and we have more where that came from. However, there is vast risk associated with travelling this path, and it is not advisable. The bigger risk is for the Communist regimes, who may view this matter as existential, but there is also massive risk to South Korea and to Seoul in particular. Seoul is close to the border, and within range of North Korean guns. In addition, North Korea may be haboring nuclear weapons, with some missiles that could hit Tokyo and perhaps Hawaii.

For the West, I think that we don't want to risk war, but that we are doing so now out of necessity. As for the Communist regimes, they know the drill. They are travelling this path of brinksmanship, and they are threatening the peace. They may have to take their lumps in consequence. In any war, the objective would be to disarm North Korea, and neutralize the threat, asap. Further Chinese assistance to the North would prolong the war.

Close Shave

Restraint by all sides could result in this incident passing without war, only to be remembered as a close shave. However, we are contemplating militaries that are on high alert about each other. The various sides will be tempted to project a presence; to probe; to bird-dog; and to test out new weapons. And rules of engagement suggest that if attacked, they may defend themselves. Restraint works when there is not a fight on. When there is a fight on, restraint has failed.

Another challenge to restraint is the fact that North and South Korea are client states, hence they have their own fingers on various triggers. The patron states may not always have complete control over the triggers that may commence a war. In Tuesday's action, it was North and South Korea, not China and the U.S., who were shooting at each other.

As I say, the Communist states know the drill. There are red lines and rules of engagement, and with their brinksmanship they know that they are pushing on those buttons.

A close shave would preserve the status quo ante. But if matters move forward, then there are possible outcomes that are very bad and very good. A U.S.-China nuclear war is an awful outcome to contemplate. It should be unthinkable, and we should fervently hope that matters don't escalate to that point. On the other hand, imagine a reunified peninsula with a single Korea, free and whole. That is the good vision, and the outcome for which we should fervently hope.

Elementary schools sometimes give grades to school children, for the category "works and plays well with other students." For North Korea, they have a grade of F in that column. They have been a menace to society for far too long, with erratic misbehavior that has been odd ball, eccentric, and dangerous to peace and security. If the fight is on, continued tenure of the North's regime should be unacceptable. In 2006, the China Support Network said that North Korea must be liberated. In the long run -- and perhaps the short run -- that is the right ultimate objective to pursue.

One reason why North Korea became belligerent recently may be because of near-rebellion within its own ranks. Senior military leaders are being passed over in favor of Kim Jong-un, a 27 year old who was recently elevated to a four-star general's rank. Perhaps hereditary succession in North Korea is meeting with some resistance, and the Kims needed a foreign crisis to focus attention elsewhere and to compel patriotic loyalty. The regime may be as fragile as eggshells.

I wonder how many North Koreans really want to proceed forward with a hereditary communist dictatorship? Discontent in North Korea may be an ace in the hole, and an interesting card for the West to play.

Before concluding this article, here are two notes. (a.) Reports on Friday indicate that artillery was heard being fired within earshot of the same island that suffered damage on Tuesday. (b.) In any negotiations, my organization stands by the same advice, advanced in a 2003 article by Zhou Yongjun and myself: Just say 'no' to North Korea. We oppose concessions and appeasement, and the taxpayers of the free world should likewise object to any use of their money that props up the regime of Kim Jong-il.

Martyr for Democracy: Hu Changxin

2010-10-31T16:26:00.002+08:00

Martyr for Democracy:
Hu Changxin, 1968-2010

- First of three stories in this update -

October 31, 2010

The China Support Network, and the pro-democracy cause more generally, has lost a much-loved friend and compatriot in the cause of freedom, democracy, and human rights. Hu Changxin was a student in Tiananmen Square during the 1989 uprising which led to the infamous June 4 massacre. Initially, he was a rank-in-file student, not recognized as a famous "student leader" of Tiananmen Square.

Hu would often tell his story of being in the final group of students which left Tiananmen Square near dawn on June 4, after a tense standoff and negotiations with the army, which had reached Tiananmen earlier overnight. Hu was with those who stayed to the bitter end.

After surviving Tiananmen and making his way to refuge in the United States, Hu had the opportunity to network his way to the center of the democracy movement in exile. He became a consistent and persistent advocate for the political reform of China, without elitism. As a supporter and booster of democracy, he became ubiquitous, assisting many different groups in the pro-democracy cause.

Often, his was not a starring role at pro-democracy events. He would travel hundreds of miles simply to hold a sign, or to be in the audience. We can say that he had no "brand loyalty." His flag was democracy, not specifically the China Support Network, nor the World Chinese Federation, nor the Wei Jingsheng Foundation, nor the China Democracy Party, nor Falun Gong, nor the coalitions outside of Chinese embassies and consulates. Hu would and did help all of these groups, becoming everybody's friend and wing man.

He may have published more often in Chinese, and less often in English. In English, he wrote fond personal remembrances when another dissident, Zhao Pinlu, died of cancer. (Published by the China Support Network in 2004.) There he said, "as a direct survivor of the great incident [June 4's Tiananmen massacre], I had cherished my sincerest hope that the Chinese government would last no longer than ten years after 1989."

Networking with the democracy movement, he was seeking "genuine national heroes, able to sweep away the cruelest power in light of ultimate justice."

In 2008, the CCP [Chinese Communist Party] caused disturbances on the streets of Flushing, New York. Falun Gong practitioners came under attack. Hu rose to their defense, and was quoted in The Epoch Times saying,

"Please take a careful look at their banners—'The Gods bless the Chinese nation.' The Chinese nation includes all Chinese people. So everyone should take a look or they will be fooled again. It is sad for us, the common people, to be fighting each other again as if it was the Cultural Revolution. Our Chinese nation has gone through too many disasters. I hope everyone will finally live a happy life."

Also in 2008, Hu was included in the recording of a new American rock song, 'Chinese Democracy (defiled).' The song is sung in English, but in the middle the musical instruments turn quiet, and for 12 seconds, the voice of Hu Changxin speaks in Mandarin. After the sound bite, the music returns to being louder. A rough translation of the sound bite says, "We students went to the Square extending an open hand to the government, which met us only with violence, tanks, and guns. It was then that we students realized -- the government is nothing but a wolf." As a result, the voice of Hu Changxin will live on in rock music from the China Support Network. (Hear the song at http://www.chinasupport.net/CSN/music.aspx)

Hu Changxin spent a life doing right by the Chinese democracy movement. The life of Hu Changxin was a call to the world to heed the noble intentions of China's would-be reformers. It was ultimately a wish that the Chinese nation "will finally live a happy life," and a challenge to the pro-democracy leaders to be "genuine national heroes, able to sweep away the cruelest power in light of ultimate justice."

We can only wish that the world, his nation, and dissident leaders will heed the final wishes of Hu Changxin.

Tang Baiqiao works on a high-octane project

June 4 student leader Tang Baiqiao is teed up to reclaim prominence in the coming new year. Together with a co-author, Damon DiMarco, and publisher Prometheus Books, he is preparing to publish a new book in March, 2011. Tang was the top student leader in Hunan Province during the 1989 uprising, and was able to have 500,000 people go out to the streets to march and rally for democratic political reform. He was captured during the post-Tiananmen crackdown; spent time in prison; and subsequently escaped to exile through Hong Kong. In the early 1990s, he was covered by news outlets including Newsweek magazine and the Wall Street Journal.

While the book is his personal memoir, it is also one part back story on a major world event, and one part follow up -- casting light on the Chinese democracy movement in exile, where the fight continues. The book will add yet another perspective on the Tiananmen story.

The project becomes very high-octane in terms of the people lining up behind it. His Holiness the Dalai Lama is writing a foreword, and AP photographer Jeff Widener (famous for snapping the "tank man" photograph) is the author of a preface. Many noted China experts and high level dissidents are also contributing endorsements for this book.

Even though the book is not released yet, it has already prompted rumblings about a possible movie adaptation to be made of it.

Wei Jingsheng likes the tone of U.S. elections this year

The United States is experiencing a year of political attack ads, knocking Communist China. America's Mao-regime-friendly politicians and media have played out their hand, and they can no longer suppress the sound of American people, raising concerns about trade with Communist China.

The emergence of the Tea Party in U.S. elections is inspiring new hope for leading Chinese dissidents, including Wei Jingsheng.

Translated by the Wei Jingsheng Foundation, a recent article in the Chinese Epoch Times explored the newly vocal U.S. angst about Red China.

In part, Wei said: "In the past, Chinese and some U.S. politicians have made a partnership of scheming together....average people of both countries did not get benefit in return. The scheme is the so-called 'China model' that rose [out of private interests]. Many U.S. politicians supported granting China permanent Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) status....But this situation is not bilateral, not free trade. In fact, the U.S. unilaterally offered China the preferential treatment. The CCP did not give the United States an open market."

As Wei sees it, "The result is that American workers lost their jobs, while China is in serious inflation. Now, the Chinese workers get less and less [purchasing power]. Both Chinese people and American people are put at a disadvantage." He reiterated, "Capitalists can buy very cheap in China and sell high in the U.S. market, from which they earn large excess profits. The excess profits exploit the Chinese labor, while harming the American workers as well."

"Then, the Communist regime uses these excess profits to buy Western politicians."

The rise of the Tea Party matters. As Wei said, "the Chinese people cannot do much, they do not dare to speak. But the American people dare; they dare to say they that they do not believe in this gang of politicians anymore. So in this election, American politicians are trying to cleanse themselves."

Wei expressed that, "Now people realize that this trade imbalance is the root cause of the depressed U.S. economy and American workers' unemployment....the politicians of both political parties in the USA are responsible. The rise of the Tea Party in the United States is the result. Though not formal, it has been important. After people realized the politicians' role, they began to organize a new faction."

The situation at hand highlights the fact that U.S. and Chinese political systems are indeed different, even though under the 'China model', "the politics of Western countries increasingly lean toward the Chinese Communist Party." The whole point in this season of China-bashing advertising is that the 'China model' is fracturing and is no longer a consensus for America's powerful.

The Tea Party teaches us that "In the United States, money cannot buy everything the politicians want when the people recognize and agree on the nature of the problem. When the politicians lose votes, they have nothing."

Wei Jingsheng concluded with a hopeful prediction: "This election has publicly exposed this problem....Through this election, there will be a change in policy
about China. Now as this information propagates, starting from the White House politicians will become increasingly hard-line against the Chinese Communist Party."

Also translated were some reader comments from the Chinese blogosphere. They included, "The free American people, go!! Go!!!!" and, "Support the people, wish the success of Tea Party election."

# # #

Free Liu Xiaobo!

2010-10-08T19:58:00.001+08:00

Demand to Chinese government:
free Liu Xiaobo!

With Liu's win of Nobel Peace Prize, Chinese dissidents
gain a first down; Chinese government stands indicted

October 8, 2010 (CSN) -- The China Support Network today welcomed the announcement, made in Norway, that jailed Chinese dissident Liu Xiaobo has won the Nobel Peace Prize and reiterated its call for the Communist party government to release Liu.

"This year, it is time to praise the wisdom of the Nobel prize committee," said the organization's founder John Kusumi. "They are highlighting a very revealing specific case of persecution which is egregious and timely for being yet-ongoing. This is a massive loss of face for Beijing. They were hoping that Liu and related issues would not come to world attention. Conversely, we were hoping for just such an occurrence."

The China Support Network (CSN) has stood with the Chinese pro-democracy movement since 1989, when the infamous June 4 massacre, perpetrated by the Communist party government, forcibly cleared out Tiananmen Square and killed some 3,000 unarmed protestors. Since 2008, when it opposed the Beijing Olympics, CSN has highlighted four high-profile prisoner cases: those of Liu Xiaobo, Gao Zhisheng, Wang Bingzhang, and Zhou Yongjun.

"I think that Liu would approve of CSN's use of today's occasion to remind the West that the Chinese democracy issue never went away; that Gao, Wang, and Zhou all have family members and children in the United States, which should escalate their cases at the State Department; and that these prisoners are patches in a wider tapestry that is the Chinese pro-democracy movement.

Kusumi opined, "Further, because the Chinese democracy issue never went away, all that changed was the attitude of those in the U.S. news media, which used to accord valuable coverage to China's human rights abuses. As they jumped on a bandwagon called free trade--which gutted the U.S. economy--they decided that human rights issues inconvenienced free trade. They have now delivered 10 years of one-sided news; they've been largely silent about human rights abuses in China. Today's news makes it obvious that those abuses are still ongoing. Coverage is not. 'No film at 11!'

He continued, "I bet that most Americans don't remember the 2009 crackdown against Uighurs in western China (alternately, in occupied East Turkestan). That crackdown got swept under the rug by the U.S. media just like the Falun Gong crackdown, and those crackdowns got less coverage than the 2008 crackdown against Tibet."

He fumed, "If I were a communist, dictator, tyrant, or thug, I would want a DC Beltway managing editor in my corner, because they make the most trusty assistants for the work of oppression out of view of the American public. More specifically, they are why Beijing's oppression has been out of view of the American public."

Elsewhere, the China Support Network blog has the full text of the Nobel Peace Prize citation. The committee correctly noted, "China is in breach of several international agreements to which it is a signatory, as well as of its own provisions concerning political rights." And it lamented, "freedoms have proved to be distinctly curtailed for China's citizens."

It noted that on Christmas Day 2009, "Liu was sentenced to 11 years in prison and two years' deprivation of political rights for 'inciting subversion of state power'." His crime, of course, was no crime. He was the non-violent author of a political tract called Charter 08, which spoke of challenges and necessary reforms which China must face in the near future.

For Americans in the home audience, it won't require deep reading into the issue, because here's the issue on the face of it: Liu Xiaobo, a good guy, is in jail. The immediate conclusion to draw is that China's government should free Liu Xiaobo, and today the China Support Network is demanding exactly that.

Wonks and analysts can note that Charter 08 was criticized by hardline Chinese dissidents for being "way too moderate." (China's dissidents come in moderate and hardline camps. Charter 08 called for reform, not revolution. In theory, Chinese authorities could lead reform, simultaneously ameliorating the perceived need for revolution.)

And yet, even for the hardline Chinese dissidents, there is a victory in today's announcement, which will reverberate in the halls of power around the world. Soviet dissidents once spoke of the relief they felt when U.S. President Ronald Reagan called the Soviet Union "an evil empire." The external pressure was music to the ears of jailed dissidents. Today, the junior evil empire is getting its external wake up call. The China Support Network approves of this year's committee decision for Liu Xiaobo to receive the Nobel Peace Prize.

While U.S. "gets tough" with China, it's not enough.

2010-09-25T12:30:00.002+08:00

While U.S. "gets tough" with China, it's not enough.

Washington has now taken some first baby steps in the right direction.

By John Kusumi
President of the pro-democracy China Support Network

To his credit, U.S. President Barack Obama is carving out a distinct profile on the matter of U.S.-China policy; different than that of his predecessors. The news of this week tells us that Obama is stiffening the spine of the United States in its dispute with Communist China about the matter of currency manipulation. China keeps its currency pegged to the dollar at an exchange rate which is artificially low when compared to where free-market forces would put that rate. The dispute impacts jobs and trade. In a free trade environment, China's behavior amounts to cheating and to gaining an artificial benefit (akin to subsidized exports) at the United States' expense.

The United States has economic problems of its own, and should not be appeasing communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs to its own detriment. We have been carrying the costs associated with bad behavior on the part of China's regime, which is still led by the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). To be very conservative in China is to be Maoist.

The China Support Network (CSN) has existed throughout an era of U.S. corruption on steroids, ever since the June 4, 1989 massacre of innocents at Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China. There, the Chinese army used live ammunition on world TV to clear away the crowd of college students, who had occupied Tiananamen Square to demand freedom, democracy, and human rights in mainland China. The CSN arose from shocked Americans, who would care to help the students -- China's Generation Xers -- in the furtherance of the Chinese democracy movement.

We have watched the U.S. government and news media become increasingly more corrupt. The U.S. government used the renewal of 'Most Favored Nation' trade status with China to add life support to the regime: to brace, buttress, stabilize, prop up, and enrich the communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs who continue to run the Chinese government to this day.

In the meantime, on human rights, the Chinese government has become worse, worse, and worse. In addition to the unanswered Tiananmen crackdown, they have since then launched the unanswered Falun Gong crackdown; the unanswered Tibet crackdown; and the unanswered East Turkestan crackdown. This means that after killing Beijing college students, the CCP went on to kill many more innocents and prisoners of conscience, from among Falun Gong practitioners, Tibetans in occupied Tibet, and Uighur Muslims in occupied East Turkestan.

How is it that government Chinese behavior on human rights could get worse and worse and worse, while U.S. rewards by way of a trade surplus got larger and larger and larger? There would be a public outcry, but for the stepped up corruption on the part of the U.S. news media, which has swept under the rug all objection and protest about Tiananmen, Falun Gong, Tibet, and East Turkestan.

I have described the U.S. media as "the corrupt, flacking for the corrupt," and indeed the China human rights issue shows us the prime example of "one hand washing the other" in the U.S. establishment, as corrupt media protects corrupt political leaders and their ruinous decisions on such matters as free trade.

So now, as news reports say that the U.S. is "getting tough" with China, how does CSN, the organization I lead, react? It becomes necessary to applaud the U.S. activity on the matter of currency manipulation, while deploring the silence and lack of activity on the matter of slave labor. We see a linkage here which is not reflected by U.S. leaders or media. These twin issues have the same net practical upshot. --China plays economic dirty pool, and as a result there is a tilted playing field which presents the United States with a competitive disadvantage.

- We are boggling at the double standard! -

We are boggling at the double standard, and believe that the existence of this double standard may impugne the motives of the U.S. political leaders and pundits who support the move on currency manipulation. Why the silence on slave labor? Is that silence indicative of a guilty demeanor on the part of the U.S. power structure on this issue?

The preceding two paragraphs already include the key observations that inform the CSN stance. We can conclude once again that the relationship between U.S. media and U.S. political leaders is that of "the corrupt, flacking for the corrupt."

Perhaps, at this juncture, someone will say, "Wait -- I need a primer on the situation." The article might do well to slow down and to explain the underpinnings. That is well and good; let's go.

Slavery abolished in America, not China

The United States, itself, abolished slavery in steps between 1862 and 1865. The first measure, in 1862, was called The Emancipation Proclamation. The last measure, in 1865, was the 13th amendment to the U.S. Constitution. At that time, China was ruled by the Qing dynasty, and authorities did not move to match the American measures.

What does abolition of slavery mean?

What does abolition of slavery mean? School children may think, "This question is easy. A freed slave gains liberty, leaves behind chains, and becomes a free man." As far as it goes, that's a fine answer -- but, those of us who are not school children should note that slavery entails another dimension: economics. In an economic sense, the abolition of slavery means that henceforth, the value of labor will be "something" rather than "nothing."

Free trade is for the free world

In 2000, U.S. President Bill Clinton was pushing through the U.S. Congress a "free trade" agreement with Communist China. The China Support Network was against that measure, as were leading Chinese dissidents (including veteran campaigners of Tiananmen Square). We were also joined by America's labor unions, and by Congressional leaders such as David Bonior, Nancy Pelosi, and Dick Gephardt.

The measure was called PNTR. The establishment says that means "Permanent Normal Trade Relations." CSN says that it means "Permanent Normal Tyranny Reward."

Free trade would be less objectionable if it stayed within the free world. While America's unions have found all such arrangements to be odious, noxious, and objectionable, some measures - like NAFTA, CAFTA, and FTAA - stay within the Western Hemisphere, where the member nations are ostensibly countries of the free world. At least they are not nuclear-armed, communist superpowers.

Abrogating the Emancipation Proclamation and 13th Amendment

When free trade extends outside of the free world and in particular to China - a nuclear-armed, communist superpower with slave labor gulags - then it takes odious, noxious, and objectionable to a new level, because it is a way for U.S. corporations to bypass the 13th Amendment. By sourcing their production and procurement to China, U.S. corporate leaders are able to leverage dirt-cheap labor in China to replace American workers (exacerbating U.S. unemployment and trade deficit problems) to pad their profits handsomely. It undermines the economy while it also undermines freedom, democracy, human rights, and U.S. national security.

This also throws U.S. workers into direct competition with the inmates of China's slave labor gulags, which are also known as Laogai concentration camps. In fact, if Washington's "name of the game" was democracy or nationhood, then we would not be implementing free trade with tyrannical regimes. The agenda to trade with China is Prime Example #1 or "the tell" which informs us that Washington's name of the game is not democracy or nationhood. Instead, their game is to enable kleptocracy and looting while turning away from any morals, scruples, values, or ethics.

Discerning readers can already tell that the China Support Network finds the "free trade with China" policy--in toto--to be inexcusable, unforgivable, and morally indefensible, if not literally criminal. (And, on the latter point, one can certainly argue that a "crime against the American worker" has occurred. Unfortunately, there is no statute which criminalizes such manipulation of the economy.)

Even free traders should object

However, if we put aside the CSN's objections to the entire package of China trade, and assume there is no objection to China trade in principle, then there is still room for supporters of free trade to be incensed at the present day circumstances with China.

The employment of slave labor, as occurs in China, is economically just as objectionable as is the Chinese practice of currency manipulation. If the idea with China trade is to allow bidirectional trade on a level playing field for both sides, well then -- slave labor tilts the playing field, just as much as currency manipulation.

In each case, the result is the same. Chinese exports are priced lower than would be the case on a level playing field, and U.S. exports are priced higher than would be the case on a level playing field. By these two means -- currency manipulation, and slave labor -- the Chinese government has tilted the playing field, and engages the U.S. with economic dirty pool. In other words, slave labor is not just a human rights abuse. It is an economic abuse.

Right now, Washington is sounding self-righteous over the matter of currency manipulation, and silent over the matter of slave labor.

The silence is very telling.

Li Lu Recaptures Imaginations on Wall Street

2010-07-31T17:07:00.000+08:00

By John Kusumi

On Friday July 30, Dow Jones newswires and the Wall Street Journal reported that Li Lu, a former Tiananmen Square student leader, is likely to be hired as a successor to Warren Buffett, the legendary investor who runs Berkshire Hathaway and manages some $100 billion.

Mere thoughts of a Buffett successor can fire the imaginations of many who watch the tycoon game of Wall Street. Combine that with two loaded words -- Tiananmen Square -- and there is yet another line of thought that fires the imagination.

Those older than 40 will remember the occasion when it happened: College students of China led an uprising in favor of freedom, democracy, and human rights in mainland China. The CCP (Communist Party) sent in the army to remove demonstrators and clear the square, which was student-occupied territory for the seven weeks leading up to June 4, 1989. The oddly-named "People's Liberation Army" opened fire with live ammunition, and now June 4 is remembered as the Tiananmen Square massacre, which killed thousands of unarmed Beijing residents. A crackdown followed, along with many more human rights abuses.

The government of China has still never changed, nor has it ever apologized to this day. In the West, to kill the protestors was seen as an outrage; an eye-popping atrocity; a crime against humanity. In China, to kill the protestors is a part of government policy, tacitly and explicitly. Those who praise Communist China today uphold that policy and that government action, whether or not they care to admit it. And a deeply flawed United States China policy has made every U.S. President from 1989 to the present into an accessory after the fact. One could wonder, what is worse -- the atrocity in China, or the atrocious policy from the U.S. Executive Branch which "extended the service life" of the Communist Party?

I believe that communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs should not abuse with impunity; nor should they rule without accountability. In 1989, I had already studied and admired Thomas Jefferson, one of America's founding fathers who drafted the Declaration of Independence. It was evident to me that some Chinese students, who were running Tiananmen Square, had also studied such people as Washington, Jefferson, Madison, Thomas Paine and Patrick Henry. I knew what they were doing; I was down with it; and therefore I launched the China Support Network, together with other American students to support the effort of the Chinese students.

Tiananmen Square was one of those occasions when world television broadcast the tragedy. Just like the Asian tsunami, or Hurricane Katrina, or the earthquake in Haiti, ordinary people mobilized to pitch in and lend a hand. The China Support Network vaulted ahead of most groups, perhaps due to its use of the early internet and the CompuServe Information Service.

In Tiananmen Square, during the uprising, Li Lu was the vice-commander of Hunger Strike Headquarters. Hunger Strike Headquarters dominated one week out of the seven week demonstration in the square. In fact, by going on hunger strike, students had won the hearts and minds of ordinary Chinese citizens, who were jolted into joining the demonstrations. The hunger strike might have continued, but it was called off when Martial Law was declared by the Beijing government in advance of the army action.

Less than two months after the massacre, my CSN organization was called in to Washington DC to help Chinese students host a visit by five Chinese dissidents. For the entire first week of August 1989, CSN worked shoulder-to-shoulder with Chinese student groups and with the five dissidents -- Li Lu was one of them. He had escaped from China by way of France, and the group was now about to reach Washington DC for the first time.

My week had a list of things to do. Rent hotel rooms. Rent wheels. Rent cell phones. Relay scheduling requests. Arrange the daybook. Answer journalist calls. Write press releases. Upload things. Download things. Visit Congress. Rally on Capitol Hill. March to the Chinese embassy. In the evenings, there was also time to socialize and make Sino - U.S. friendships at the Generation X level. I had to struggle with chopsticks, which are unfamiliar if you are raised by an Irish Catholic mother.

I guess that Hippies had the Summer of '69, and GenXers had the Summer of '89. They had Woodstock, and we had Tiananmen Square. (And we won't ever let you forget about it, either! :)

Yet, the pace of CSN slowed after the Summer of '89. It seemed that everybody was returning to college. The Chinese democracy movement had been an extracurricular activity. Those student leaders who had escaped from China and arrived in America got scholarships. Li Lu went to Columbia University, where I visited him upon his invitation to go swimming there. But I myself returned to Arizona State University, and the Chinese democracy movement split into factions: hardline, moderate, and sold out former dissidents who quit the playing field.

Li Lu may have signalled his future course of activity early in the game. Other student leaders, such as Shen Tong, previously advocated the use of "all available means" including sanctions, to put a stop to the Tiananmen crackdown. But, Li Lu articulated a view that "we want human rights, but we don't want sanctions." This remains the great schism in the middle of the Chinese democracy movement. Hardliners want sanctions, or what we'd now call economic pressure brought to bear to encourage human rights. Moderates want the rights, but not the pressure.

By the first week in August, 1989, we were already seeing the divide of factionalism which came to hobble the democracy movement. Li Lu had already planted his feet in the moderate camp. This may be one reason why the Tiananmen crackdown still continues even now, 21 years after the massacre. Two dissidents -- Zhou Yongjun and Liu Xiaobo -- are now in prison, each for his third interval as a political prisoner, post-Tiananmen.

Of course, dissident factionalism always gets the blame, but it is worth remembering that men such as George Bush Sr., Henry Kissinger, and Brent Scowcroft were running United States China policy. They rightly deserve blame for letting China get away with murder, with barely a slap on the wrist. In fact, many Americans were appalled at how President Bush handled (or failed to handle) the Tiananmen matter.

As I put it, Bush (and later Presidents) "extended the service life" of the Communist Party, at a time when we were just out of the Reagan years. We were accustomed to staunch anti-communism coming from the U.S. Executive Branch. But about the Tiananmen matter, there was nobody home at the U.S. Executive Branch.

U.S.-China policy even bothered Li Lu. I recall that he published an op-ed article, with headline "In China, I'd Be Dead." The subheadline said, "And Bush Wouldn't Care." Bush's China policy was so bad that Chinese dissidents lined up behind the challenger, Bill Clinton, in the next presidential election. Clinton promised a tougher China policy, and Americans voted for it.

Americans voted for it (Bill Clinton won). But, U.S. presidential elections had already become fraudulent occasions of fakery. Americans do not get what they vote for. They vote for change, and what happens is more of the same. Bill Clinton reduced, and did not increase, pressure on China. But, Li Lu had given a speech at the Democratic National Convention where Clinton was nominated. Chinese dissidents were used as political props, then discarded. This was Clintonian duplicity.

Li Lu continued at Columbia University until the late 1990s, when he dropped out of politics and started a Wall Street hedge fund, Himalaya Capital. He's been a Wall Street hedge fund manager ever since, and came to the attention of Warren Buffett, who is now reported to be hiring Li Lu for a superstar role in the investment world.

A lot of Wall Street types will now react with sympathy to Li Lu. Does that mean a righteous aversion to the injustice of Tiananmen? Yes, it does. But, what is a trader to think next? Let's imagine filling in the blank: "Tiananmen was bad. ________ " Tiananmen was bad, and we still trade with that same regime -- the politically un-reformed Communist Party. The one that continues to jail, torture, and kill dissidents even right now, today.

Here at the China Support Network, we believe that everyone should be agitating to "cut off the Communists." Mainland China should be on the receiving end of a tariff for tyranny, a tariff for currency manipulation, a tariff for slave labor, a tariff for recklessness with the environment, a tariff for recklessness with consumer safety, and perhaps also a tariff for their disrespect of U.S. intellectual property. In fact, these tariffs are 21 years overdue. Washington still "owes us" a fitting response to Tiananmen Square.

The recent publishing about Li Lu exposes that there has been no justice for the atrocity at Tiananmen Square. There is no closure for victims or their families. The wound of history is still an open sore. The Communist Party and the U.S. Executive Branch both deserve pushback. CSN wants to congratulate Li Lu and invite everyone else to visit us at www.chinasupport.net.

Obama's best is not good enough

2010-06-22T23:49:00.003+08:00

The China Support Network is not impressed by U.S.-China policy, despite revaluation of the RMB currency

By John Kusumi

In America these days, public opinion polling consistently finds Jobs to be the top concern of Americans, and it very much seems that U.S. President Barack Obama has delayed his long-promised move to "pivot and focus on jobs."

The pivot and focus seemed to be delayed first by health care as a big issue, and then by financial regulation as a big issue, and then by the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico. Perhaps Obama doesn't want to focus squarely on jobs, because then he would see the failure of NAFTA, WTO, PNTR, and the like -- the neo-liberal trade agenda. To regain American industrial jobs, Obama needs to reverse that trade policy, and he is clearly in no hurry to do so.

Or perhaps, in focusing on jobs, Obama would see the failure of his own stimulus. The 2009 stimulus did little to stimulate aggregate demand in America, but Obama succeeded in one thing -- he stimulated the economy of Communist China, where exports have recently surged by nearly 50%.

Due to the neo-liberal trade program, consumption leaks out to Communist China.

Currency adjustment announced

It has long been an objective of U.S. politicians to get the Chinese government to raise the value of its currency, which was artificially pegged to the U.S. dollar -- ensuring that imports would be cheap in the U.S., and that the export sector of China would grow larger than it otherwise would have in the absence of the currency peg.

This past weekend, China announced that it would permit the value of its Yuan / RMB currency to rise. The U.S. side had fostered a consistent drum beat of criticism for China that served to brow beat its leaders about this issue.

This week, Toronto Canada is hosting a summit meeting for leaders of the G-20, a group which represents 42 nations in world economics. China's move permits it to escape criticism at the G-20, which otherwise would have continued the drum beat that was critical of China on this matter.

However, the currency will not be freely floating; it is going to rise slowly with a collar, or trading band, that will serve to slow down the appreciation of the currency.

China Support Network takes exception with both East and West

I too have denounced Chinese currency manipulation, from my perch at the China Support Network, a human rights group which was formed to stand in support of China's pro-democracy dissidents. In this video, I said,

The simple fact is that the manipulation of the currency is economic dirty pool. It tilts the playing field. And I believe that any U.S. President ought to care to have a level playing field for the business concerns here vis-a-vis the business concerns in China.

And so to level the playing field, the currency corrective tariff is important, but so too is that labor tariff which I spoke about, simply because the employment of slave labor is another means of tilting the playing field.

American leaders would do well to review the video I quoted, and in particular to study my line above -- "so too is that labor tariff which I spoke about...the employment of slave labor is another means of tilting the playing field." It is factually true that speaking in economic terms, China's labor practices are similar to currency manipulation in that both are economic dirty pool. Both practices result in unnaturally low prices of Chinese exports that become U.S. imports. Both practices add to the U.S. trade deficit, and delete U.S. jobs. It's flatly true.

It's flatly true, but the recent drum beat about Beijing's currency manipulation revealed that something is wrong with U.S. policy makers and opinion leaders. I would really like to confront President Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, and Senator Chuck Schumer, and even Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner about this. I'd like to hear how they excuse their lack of concern about the issue of slave labor in China.

I am given to believing that in that case, I would be confronting four sociopaths. Why did they fight currency manipulation? --Because it is economic dirty pool. What is slavery in economic terms? --It is economic dirty pool. Just as much so -- both practices are equally vulnerable to criticism on economic grounds. Why, then, make an issue out of one, and treat the other as a non-issue?

I believe that it is entirely due to the evil natures of Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, Chuck Schumer, Tim Geithner, and for that matter all of the talking heads, chattering class, and analysts in U.S. journalism.

American leaders share an ingrained snooty outlook. They respect white collar jobs, and ONLY white collar jobs. Those jobs are outposts within Corporate America, jobs held by people. Conversely, other kinds of jobs are only held by "unpeople." "Unpeople" are never talked about, except at election time when politicians want the votes of those "unpeople."

Currency manipulation is an issue surrounding foreign exchange (forex). Forex is a white collar job, a job held by people. On the other hand, slave labor in China involves the slaves themselves -- performing work that is blue collar, rather than white collar, in nature. The work involved is performed by "unpeople." U.S. politicians don't even need votes from those "unpeople" in other lands, and (e.g.) CNBC anchors would never lower themselves to talk sympathetically about "unpeople."

So, they'll talk the currency issue and ignore the labor issue. To my eyes, they thereby reveal themselves for being the evil sociopaths that they are. Shame on them.

Before concluding this article, let me restate: The China Support Network demands that Beijing immediately abolish the systems of Laogai (labor/slavery camps) and Laojiao (administrative detention). We will continue to brow beat the powerful on this issue, because we know that currency revaluation is only half the battle. Indeed, China also needs to raise its environmental standards, its consumer protection (including product safety!) standards, and its intellectual property standards. In that light, currency revaluation is LESS than half the battle.

With half or more of the battle still ahead of us, it is too early for U.S. leaders to declare victory and go home. It would be good of them if they would step up and escalate the Chinese labor/slavery issue to equal urgency and prominence as the Chinese currency issue.

If they step up and actually do so, then I would revise my assessment of these U.S. establishment figures. Was it premature for me to call them evil? --Time will tell.

I hope that they prove me wrong by way of deeds. I hope they stand with the China Support Network against Beijing's systems of Laogai and Laojiao.

2010-06-03T11:31:00.002+08:00

Goddess-gate Update

Authorities in Hong Kong test the patience
of the pro-democracy movement

The Goddess of Democracy, herself, is the main character in this year's activities surrounding the 21st anniversary of China's Tiananmen crackdown. The Goddess of Democracy was originally created by students at Beijing's Central Academy of Fine Arts, and installed during the "June 4" uprising at Tiananmen Square. It stood from May 30, 1989 - June 4, 1989, when the army demolished the statue upon reaching Tiananmen Square after shooting their way through the streets of Beijing, killing at least 3,000 innocent civilians.

What is at hand is a developing story based in Hong Kong. Something new has occurred each day since Saturday, May 29. This update simply repeats the news in chronological sequence, for a timeline or reference of events to date.

Translation note: The China Support Network, in this report, is applying the "gate" suffix to indicate a scandal. It is not standard formal English to do so, but ever after the Watergate scandal brought down the U.S. President Richard Nixon in 1974, it became a conventional practice of American journalists to append "gate" as a suffix onto words, for a shorthand way to indicate that a political scandal exists in connection with a word.

Goddess-gate, Day 1, Saturday May 29, 2010:

First Goddess Captured

Hong Kong police arrest 13 and seize the first (6.4 meter) Goddess of Democracy Statue and another piece of artwork. The 13 activists of the Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China were at the Times Square shopping mall of Causeway Bay, to diseminate information about the pro-democracy cause and this year's activities for the 21st anniversary of the June 4 crackdown. The activists were freed on bail later on Saturday. Via a Facebook group, Alliance members threatened to surround North Point police station - where the art was kept - if the items were not returned by Thursday evening, in time for annual June 4th commemoration in Victoria Park.

The official justification for the action named the Food and Environmental Hygiene department as the department objecting to the unlicensed display of the Goddess. However, it's not just that department. If one looks ahead in the story to “Goddess-gate Day 5,” one can see the Hong Kong immigration department also participating in this episode of political suppression.

Goddess-gate, Day 2, Sunday May 30, 2010:

Second Goddess Captured

Defiant demonstrators paraded a smaller (2.2 meter) Goddess of Democracy Statue through the streets of Hong Kong. This, too, was seized by police. Several protesters tried to prevent the removal by lying on the road. Two activists, Alliance vice chairman Lee Cheuk-yan and member Leung Kwok-wah, were arrested. A group of at least 20 sympathizers gathered outside the North Point police station calling for their immediate release. Some even tried to force their way into the station. Lee and Leung were released on bail at 10:30pm.

Goddess-gate, Day 3, Monday May 31, 2010:

A defiant demonstrator dressed up as the Goddess of Democracy for another march in the streets of Hong Kong. The police could not confiscate the live demonstrator.

Goddess-gate, Day 4, Tuesday June 1, 2010:

Two Goddesses Released

After a two hour negotiation with Alliance activists at the North Point police station, Hong Kong police “free” the two statues. According to the Hong Kong Standard, “Acting Chief Superintendent Anna Tsang Yim- sheung of the Police Public Relations Branch said the statues were released early as a goodwill gesture. Tsang added: ’We understand the organizers had an urgent need to set up the statues for the vigil on June 4. So we made an appropriate arrangement.’”

The Standard also noted that “Alliance officials refused to sign a document in which they would have acknowledged violating the Places of Public Entertainment Ordinance with their Times Square activities and pledging to make applications in future.”

The Goddesses were moved to Victoria Park for the upcoming June 4 memorial vigil.

Sculptor Chen Weiming flew to Hong Kong from Los Angeles to inspect his statue for damage.

Goddess-gate, Day 5, Wednesday June 2, 2010:

Chen Weiming Deported; Nancy Pelosi Issues Statement

The government of Hong Kong refuses entry to Chen Weiming and deports him. The Associated Press quoted opposition lawmaker James To as saying, “We are very annoyed. Why is Hong Kong denying him entry for political reasons? He is a very humble sculptor.”

Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, Nancy Pelosi, issued a statement for the 21st anniversary of Tiananmen, and noted the Goddess-gate controversy in Hong Kong.

She said, “This year for the first time [in Hong Kong], police arrested activists and confiscated the Goddess of Democracy replica statue that is the symbol of the Tiananmen movement. This crackdown on freedom of expression will only succeed in shining a spotlight on the courage of Hong Kong’s democratic movement. The United States must stand solidly with the people of Hong Kong in their desire for democracy and freedom of speech and assembly.”

# # #

2010 June 4 Events

2010-06-02T09:01:00.001+08:00

Events to commemorate
21 years since Tiananmen Square

- Hong Kong police have seized two Goddess of Democracy
statues in advance of June 4, 2010 -

For the Chinese democracy movement, it's the biggest day of the year. For seven weeks in the spring of 1989, the pro-democracy uprising--led by Beijing college students--was in control of Tiananmen Square. On June 3-4, 1989, Chinese troops of the oddly-named 'People's Liberation Army' shot their way into Beijing and retook Tiananmen Square, killing over 3,000 peaceful unarmed civilians in the process. It is famous as the "June 4" massacre. Here are events happening this week around the world to commemorate the 21st anniversary of that bloody June 4:

SLOGANS FOR 2010:
Remember June 4, Pass On The Flame Vindicate June 4, Persist To The End
Free/Release Wang Bingzhang Free/Release Zhou Yongjun
Free/Release Liu Xiaobo, Support Charter 08 Free/Release Gao Zhisheng
Oppose Political Persecution, Protest Political Suppression

Hong Kong, June 4
Who: Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China
What: Candlelight Vigil
Where: Victoria Park, football fields
Date: Friday, June 4, 2010
Tiime: 8:00pm

This event continues the annual tradition of observances for the June 4 anniversary. In 2009, some 150,000 people attended this event to mark the 20th anniversary of the June 4 massacre.

Note: Police in Hong Kong broke up a demonstration and arrested activists on May 29 as they tried to commemorate the 21st anniversary of Tiananmen Square, outside Times Square shopping mall in Causeway Bay. Because the police also confiscated a statue, the Goddess of Democracy (a replica of the statue which students erected in Tiananmen Square), there is a Facebook group that is threatening to march on the police station, if they do not return the statue by June 3.

From here at CSN, it looks like marching on the police station is not officially on the program of the Alliance. It appears that the Alliance and the Facebook group are two unrelated entities. Because we do not know otherwise, we would suggest that to march on the police station is a separate and distinct matter, "extracurricular" to the Candlelight Vigil. The vigil is the yearly ritual of the Alliance.

Who: Stage64
What: "Edelweiss," a theatrical play in Cantonese (love story centers in Tiananmen Square, '89)
Where: Auditorium of HKICC Lee Shau Kee School of Creativity
Date: Five shows on Saturday, Sunday, and Monday, June 5, 6, and 7, 2010
Time: 3:00pm and 8:00pm
Tickets: HK$80 through the Hong Kong Professional Teachers' Union
More: Discounts for students, seniors, disabled, and social security recipients; the first show on June 5 is a "special show for students" at half price.
URL: http://stage64.hk/eng/

New York, June 4
Who: New York area China Democracy Party, China Support Network, and other groups
What: Street protest
Where: Chinese Consulate on the west side of Manhattan, 42nd St/12th Ave
Date: Friday, June 4, 2010
Time: 6:00pm-9:00pm
More: Speakers may include Wang Juntao, Wang Youcai, and other leading dissidents; event to include musicians playing acoustically

Washington, June 2 and 3
Who: Initiatives for China
What: "A Peek Behind The Wall" open mic forum
Where: "Bus Boys & Poets," 5th and K Street, NW, Washington DC
Date: Wednesday, June 2, 2010
Time: 6:00pm-8:00pm
More: Chinese citizens from the mainland and abroad will speak of what it's like to be a citizen of China today. The open question: "How Has China Changed For Ordinary Citizens Since Tiananmen, 1989?"
Contact: Jim Geheran at 202.290.1423

Who: Initiatives for China, The Independent Federation of Chinese Students and Scholars (IFCSS), and co-sponsoring groups
What: Events at the Victims of Communism Memorial
(A.:) From 3:00-6:00, Initiatives for China continues "A Peek Behind The Wall" open mic forum (see above).
(B.:) From 6:00-9:00, IFCSS conducts the Candlelight Vigil in Washington -- an annual tradition to observe the June 4 anniversary.
Where: New Jersey Avenue/G Street, NW, Washington DC
Date: Thursday, June 3, 2010
Time: (A.:) 3:00-6:00pm; (B.:) 6:00-9:00pm
More: The Victims of Communism Memorial includes a statue of the Goddess of Democracy. It is found two blocks west of Union Station in downtown Washington, DC.

Mainland China

The activist, Yang Jianli, is known for his "Gong Min Walk" of 2008 in which he walked 500 miles from Boston to Washington, DC. He thanked Americans for their support (he had been a political prisoner, 2002-2007) and raised awareness of China's human rights abuses in advance of the anniversary of the June 4 massacre -- and in advance of the Beijing Olympics that year. Gong Min Walks have been replicated around the world by other activists, and now one is occurring inside Mainland China.

Yang Jianli says, "The idea of Gong Min walking as method of non violent protest is becoming recognized as an effective way for ordinary citizens to express dissatisfaction with government actions and policies while minimizing the threat of arrest....We do not expect a one shot success. We will take one step at a time. I believe citizens' rights have to be earned with patience and perseverance. Gradually China will change and advance towards democracy."

Yang Jianli heads the group, Initiatives for China, where the contact person is Jim Geheran at 202.290.1423. Initiatives for China is withholding the names and locations of Gong Min walkers in China to avoid tipping off the Chinese authorities with these details. The group will release more information upon the completion of related actions.

# # #

Hillary Clinton in Beijing; response

2010-05-24T07:42:00.002+08:00

Hillary Clinton visits Beijing;
Pro-Chinese democracy groups
run good cop/bad cop response

With open letters to Obama, Clinton, Huntsman, and Posner

By John Kusumi

The China Support Network has been known to email newsletter updates to its list. The updates also get published at its blog and website (www.chinasupport.net), and are public information that may be freely picked up by journalists, bloggers, aggregators, etc.

This time around, the format will vary. Our newsletter has news about U.S. President Barack Obama, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Ambassador to China Jon Huntsman, and Assistant Secretary of State Michael Posner. I want to combine news writing with an open letter to them.

In the concerns of the China Support Network, Obama/Clinton/Huntsman/Posner ("OCHP") somewhat blur together. The common denominator is that they are the villains responsible for running present-day U.S. China policy, which is akin to its very own crime against humanity.

This used to be the China policy of George Herbert Walker Bush ("GHWB"), and then it was the Bill Clinton China policy, and then it was the George W. Bush China policy, and now it is the OCHP China policy. Bush, Clinton, and Bush set a very bad precedent, and now OCHP are carrying the same tune.

Context

The China Support Network is for push back at Chinese Communism. CSN formed 21 years ago upon witnessing the Tiananmen Square massacre, a man made disaster (made by China's PLA Army) and bloodbath (drawing blood from innocent Chinese civilians, in a pro-democracy uprising led by Beijing college students). CSN has been horrified to observe three more bloody Chinese crackdowns in recent years: against Falun Gong, Tibetans, and Uighurs.

The simple fact that we've observed three more bloody crackdowns should tell one and all that China has not gotten better on human rights. That was the sugar coating that Bill Clinton used to sell in his policy: "Trade will bring freedom," Clinton said. Far from it -- instead, China has gotten worse. The human rights disaster, now unfolding there, should be seen as a problem which calls into question the U.S. non-response -- which may also be called the "business-as-usual China policy."

Every year from April 15 to June 4, it is "Tiananmen season." Now it's the 21st anniversary of the seven-week uprising. 21 years ago right now, Beijing college students, not the government, held effective control at Tiananmen Square. Our big day of the year is always June 4, the anniversary of the massacre which cleared out Tiananmen Square. Many campaigners in our cause will deliver speeches on June 4.

In 2010, it seems like these seven weeks are a special time for the Obama administration to deliver insults and pathetic performances in the eyes of pro-Chinese-democracy supporters. We recently observed the farce of a Sino-U.S. human rights dialogue, conducted by Michael Posner behind closed doors, and kept under wraps at his tight-lipped press conference (and summarily buried by the U.S. news media).

News

There is something like a World's Fair occurring at the Shanghai World Expo. This weekend, Hillary Clinton visited there. It's been reported that the United States pavillion at the Expo is a drab, under-developed embarrassment. At the last minute, they threw together this pavillion with three movie theaters and a gift shop. Visitors will see three corporate sponsored movies and then be invited to "buy here." Products in the gift shop are Made In China. On second thought, maybe the pavillion is accurately reflecting America these days.

The best statesmanship of the 21st century occurred on May 20, 2010, when a TV guest said, "There's ash in the air, oil in the water, and blood in the streets." Mother nature, and the private sector, and the government all seem unable to keep their act clean. At a time like this, where do we find Hillary Clinton, and what do we find her doing? --She was giving teddy bears to children at the Shanghai World Expo!

A report by Reuters did not specify whether those particular teddy bears were Made In China. Reuters said, "After the film, Clinton handed out teddy bears to children in the audience....The U.S. exhibit ends with a gift shop where a great many products -- from teddy bears and stuffed bison to silver lapel pins and pink cowboy hats -- were all marked 'Made in China.'"

To these American leaders, the China Support Network can say, "Heckuva job with U.S. export promotion." In the 2010 Tiananmen season, your administration has displayed failure on human rights, and failure on U.S. export promotion. Also, House Resolution 605 (on 3/16/2010) called for you to escalate the matter of Falun Gong (FG) persecution and for your administration to meet with the FG freedom fighters. You have failed to do so.

Analysis

After the Cold War, it very much feels like somebody kidnapped America itself, and replaced it with America's evil twin. We used to know that liberals and conservatives alike were in favor of human rights (and for that matter, the U.S. Constitution). Now, after a concerted effort with blue smoke and mirrors, liberals and conservatives have seemingly been supplanted by neo-liberals and neo-conservatives. It may be too generous to call Obama, Clinton, Huntsman, and Posner "American leaders." More accurately, they are neo-American neo-leaders.

I, for one, am getting sick and tired of American government that is anti-American and that works against the best interests of this nation. U.S. China policy is a prime example of a policy that principally benefits the communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs of Communist China. In addition there may be about 25 CEOs in America who benefit from an inexpensive supply chain which China enables through its laogai gulag, its exploitation of labor, and its repression of worker rights and benefits -- and also through disasterous environmental policies and the manipulative currency peg to the dollar.

Those 25 CEOs are extracting profit from China trade, but more accurately, one should say "blood soaked profits." It was the choice of Bill Clinton to value and favor those 25 CEOs over and above the 1.3 billion populace of China and the 300 million populace of America. That was a dangerous, craven choice when Bill Clinton announced it in 1999, and it has been a ruinous, craven policy ever since. It has enriched communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs, and it has financed a military buildup which threatens Taiwan and the allies who would rise to Taiwan's defense; even while it has deindustrialized America and expanded U.S. unemployment and labor woes.

In 2009, it was a pratt fall for this administration's human rights policy when Hillary Clinton travelled to Beijing and minimized the human rights issue -- openly revealing contempt for the issue in her remarks to reporters. That attitude is a marker of "neo-American neo-leaders," as I call them. In response, I issued the CSN response -- perhaps the angriest post ever, to scorch her "dismal and disgusting debut." I accused her of having a tin ear, obliviousness, and an easy countenance for evil. The post was titled "Hillary Clinton Visits Her Communist Masters In Beijing," and referred to the Clintons as "the pro-Maoist first couple."

Now, she is back in Beijing for the ostensible "U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue." The human rights issue is not a part of that dialogue, because the off-line meeting with Michael Posner got that "out of the way," to enable Hillary to talk about what really interests her. (I think she has predictable talking points: Please buy our bonds. Please float your currency. Please help us with Iran. Please help us with North Korea. She might work in some export promotion, but no human rights concerns.) Basically, I can restate the headline from my earlier post: Hillary Clinton visits her Communist masters in Beijing.

My analysis really hasn't changed since last February, when I wrote:

"Hillary Clinton played her cards by basically folding. She may have inadvertently signaled to Beijing that they have a green light to invade Taiwan. This trip was a loss of face for the United States, and a blazing display of weakness. The only winners from this trip were communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs – they got the signal that they can continue doing business as usual.

"Bill and Hillary Clinton are forever in a hasty rush to Maoism. Barack Obama ought to fire Hillary Clinton."

Message

Recall that this newsletter doubles as an open letter to Obama, Clinton, Huntsman, and Posner -- and that earlier, I described U.S. China policy as "akin to its very own crime against humanity." It is also a crime against the American worker. The China policy that you are running serves to bless the U.S. trade deficit with China, and to bless the related drain of jobs from America's former industrial base. In the news, we keep hearing (maybe after health care; maybe after FINREG?) that Obama will "pivot and focus on the jobs issue."

If and when it finally comes about that your administration pivots and focuses on the jobs issue (Where have you been?), you will find it necessary to stop the flirtatious love affair with the Chinese Communist Party.

My message to you is, "Stop the flirtatious love affair with the Chinese Communist Party."

A large caucus of members in Congress recently wrote to back up Taiwan's request for F-16s. I urge you to approve and conclude that sale.

A large caucus of members in Congress (it was nearly unanimous in the House) passed H.R.605, calling for the end of Falun Gong persecution in China -- and specifically urging the administration to meet with freedom fighters and Chinese dissidents related to this cause. I urge you to heed that resolution, and therefore to meet with people such as Professor Sen Nieh, Doctors Li Dayong, Wenyi Wang and Charles Lee, etc.

For a side note, I've recently had dinner with the freedom fighters mentioned above, and they may ask to bring me in to such a meeting.

I am ambivalent when I think of meeting with you. It is an edgy call, because you might best represent sheer evil and American brain damage. At least I'm on the record with word that I am absolutely not down with the games that you play. If the name of the game was nationhood, America would respect its economic boundaries and close the trade deficit so that you stimulate the American economy rather than the Chinese economy. Under the "neo-American" China policy, nationhood is not the name of the game. More accurately, the game is private sector looting of public goods that should be protected by the public sector -- and, failing to protect American interests, I repeat that you might best represent sheer evil and American brain damage.

You simply must stop the flirtatious love affair with the Chinese Communist Party. Exactly who is well-served by this pattern of behavior on your part? Not America. Not the Chinese democracy movement. Not human rights, world-wide. Not the workers in America. Not the workers in China. The only people who are well served by this policy are the 25 CEOs who are best positioned to profit by this policy.

As you "pivot and focus on jobs" (we've been hearing that for awhile now...) you ought to be able to rebalance priorities and decide that trade deficits are a bad thing. To close the trade deficit, it is time to consider such things as a tyranny tariff, a currency manipulation/corrective tariff, a labor conditions tariff, an environmental conditions tariff, and a consumer protections tariff -- and, perhaps, a tariff that's based on respect for intellectual property. If you cannot stand up for America, its interests, and its values as above --then you ought to step aside, for leadership that can rebalance priorities and redress these grievances.

For the pro-democracy movement, we can run a good cop / bad cop routine. You have just heard from the China Support Network, in its role as the bad cop. There is also a good cop today -- known as the China Interim Government.

More news

A dissident group called the China Interim Government has been busy. They have been on the receiving end of cyber attacks from Beijing, but they have also replied with some of their own -- successfully hacking into websites of the Communist Party and planting their flag.

They have been very appreciative of the righteous move by Google, to abandon the Chinese market and to stand for internet freedom. They appreciated the speech by Hillary Clinton, escalating the priority of internet freedom as an issue.

The Washington Post recently reported, "State Department officials recently called the group, the Global Internet Freedom Consortium, offering it $1.5 million...A State Department official, speaking on the condition of anonymity, confirmed the offer."

The Global Internet Freedom Consortium (GIFC) is a group of Chinese freedom campaigners, and GIFC develops software to overcome the barriers of blockage and censorship that are presented by the Chinese government with its Golden Shield, or "Great Firewall of China."

Basically, the U.S. State Department is providing $1.5 million to an activist group that works in alignment with pro-Chinese democracy and Falun Gong campaigners.

The China Interim Government, where the President is the prominent Chinese dissident Wu Fan, has written to say "thank you" to the U.S. administration. I received their letter in Chinese, and I worked to improve the English from a machine translation. Here, I will insert the letter, allowing this group to speak for itself:

Dear US Government:

Regarding your recent decision to allocate funds of $1.5 million US dollars to fund the Global Internet Freedom Consortium, in pursuit of its goal to develop software that helps users worldwide to bypass the internet filtering of mainland China, we would like to indicate our support and gratitude, and applaud where it indicates your stepped up contribution for America's global promotion of internet freedom and free world values.

We believe that your promotion of internet freedom and free world values enhances the world's peace and prosperity, while also enhancing U.S. national security.

We believe that the overwhelming majority of the world's people, regardless of which country they live in, hope for themselves and their families to live in security, freedom, and a harmonious environment which encourages their hopes for honest and friendly dealings and cooperation with mutual confidence. --It is a natural instinct for humanity to hope so.

However, we have also seen the harsh realities of many forms of crime, terrorism, war, and conflict. Humanity has been through many centuries of suffering such wars and conflict. With modern technology's introduction of Weapons of Mass Destruction, humanity is faced with an impossibly heavy burden.

How to fundamentally eliminate each kind of crime and terrorism, then eliminate the war and the conflict which this produces, is already of immediate concern, and there is no time to avoid this topic!

China Interim Government takes these concerns seriously -- as seriously as we know that U.S. President Barack Obama takes his Nobel Peace Prize.

China's traditional culture believes that human nature is natively friendly -- that each person is born with instincts and tendencies to be good.

The reason we have all sorts of crimes and the terrorism, is because the will of the people has been polluted and human nature has been distorted. Regardless of whether one speaks of communism, fascism, or terrorism, the gravest injury to the world has been the pollution to the will of the people and the distortion to human nature. With violent thoughts and willful instigation, careerists of communism, fascism, and terrorism instill hatred and provoke conflict and war.

Therefore, to fundamentally eliminate such crime and terrorism, and resulting wars and conflicts, one cannot rely on hard military power exclusively. Indeed, it should be more important to purify the will of the people and cure the distortions of human nature as mentioned to solve the basic problem.

Communism, fascism, and terrorism have it in common that they control people's thoughts through brainwashing. Just as darkness fears light, their evil thoughts are frightened of real information and correct ideas. No matter whether we look back to Hitler and Stalin, or presently to Beijing, Pyongyang, or Tehran, these regimes spare no effort to block, censor, and hide the truth, real information, and correct ideas, because they base their political power on ignorance and superstition.

To break the information blockage, there is no better method than promoting and providing the impetus for internet freedom and overthrowing the on-line Berlin Wall. To fight crime and terrorism thoroughly, the best method is to enable and promote the good instincts of human nature and free world values.

Because they believe in good, yet were met by brutal persecution in China, some Falun Gong practitioners set up the Global Internet Freedom Consortium, with the goal to develop software that enables the populace of China's police state to surmount the on-line Berlin Wall. An understanding of information from the free world is a sharp weapon in their battle with evil.

Other Falun Gong practitioners set up the Shen Yun performing arts troupe, to reinvigorate traditional Chinese arts. They have toured the world to high acclaim, winning hearts and minds as they restore the human spirit. Because they fear the power of such revivals and spiritual awakenings, the CCP/mainland government arranged to block, cancel, and obstruct their performances in Hong Kong, which were scheduled earlier this year.

From the internet blockade and from the banning of the Shen Yun performing arts shows, we can clearly read from this how very fearful the CCP/mainland government is. Influence from the free world and from Falun Gong can eradicate the violent thoughts, the brainwashing, the distortion of human nature, the pollution of the people's will, and can thereby challenge the crime, the terrorism, the conflict, and the war.

In this sense, we find it significant that the US Government has allocated funds to the Global Internet Freedom Consortium. This gives a boost to Falun Gong practitioners who would rise above the mundane; it sets them up to succeed; and it signals that the US Government is doing fundamental ground work to combat many kinds of crime and terrorism.

We think this is a great beginning. To the US Government, this is only a half step, but in regard to the many layers of crises in human culture; in regard to solving world conflicts and wars; this is a stride in the right direction.

China Interim Government now admires the acuity of the Nobel Peace Prize committee. These matters give us more hope and anticipation that in the near future, by working together with sincere cooperation, that we and the US Government can build a legacy of peace for the universe, and a prosperous and happy world.

# # #

For U.S.-China rights dialogue this week

2010-05-10T14:32:00.003+08:00

CSN ‘cautiously pessimistic’ about

U.S.-China rights dialogue

This week, the U.S. and China will meet in Washington

to discuss human rights. CSN issues demands for

the Communists, the Americans, and the media.

A public statement for immediate release, May 10, 2010
By John Kusumi, President, the China Support Network

The China Support Network began in 1989 when Tiananmen Square's bloody massacre – armed government troops slaughtering unarmed citizens and college students – was brazenly committed on world television. The occasion demanded push back against the Communist Party, which continues to be China’s government today. I described the atrocity and crackdown as "huge, epic, monumental, egregious, and not to be forgotten by history."

I was a fresh-faced 22-year-old undergraduate of Arizona State University. At that time, I was not versed in the full history of the CCP -- the Chinese Communist Party. They had seized power by barrels of guns, winning a civil war in 1949, and had then ruled China with an iron fist for 40 years.

At Tiananmen Square, they had called out the army against their own people, led by the college students of Beijing, who had taken over Tiananmen Square for seven weeks. It is good to recall that before it was a massacre, Tiananmen Square was an uprising that demanded freedom, democracy, and human rights for the populace of mainland China.

Chinese dissidents vowed to continue the Chinese democracy movement by other means, and the China Support Network vowed to help the cause. I’ve now had 21 years of running the China Support Network in the service of China's democracy movement. The rule of Communism in that land is now 61 years long, and I have been fighting it for half of my lifetime.

Or perhaps, in 1989 I was not so very fresh-faced. I first appeared in America’s national news as the "18-year-old" candidate for U.S. President in 1984, talking up the politics of practical idealism. Having begun at age 17, I gave new meaning to the term "minor candidate." Seemingly, I began by wagging my finger at America about its politics, and more recently I’ve been scolding China about its politics and human rights abuses, which include killing – lots of killing.

All of that killing in Communist China remains the point of the China Support Network and the wider international human rights community, of which CSN is a part. The CSN is known as a human rights group and NGO, meaning a non-governmental organization within civil society. We are also part of the Coalition for the International Criminal Court.

This week, on May 13-14, America and China have slated meetings in Washington for a human rights dialogue, being resumed for the first time since 2008. Ostensibly, this is about the concerns of the China Support Network.

The meeting this week comes during "Tiananmen season." Every year from April 17-June 4, it is the anniversary of events in Tiananmen Square -- the uprising before the crackdown. 21 years ago right now, the Square was occupied territory, controlled by college students such as Zhou Yongjun, who recently got a third prison term as a political prisoner, sentenced to spend the next 9 years incarcerated.

Likewise, Tiananmen figure Liu Xiaobo recently got a third prison term as a political prisoner, sentenced to 11 years’ incarceration. The two prison sentences are a signal that Beijing fully intends on having a third decade of ongoing persecution in the Tiananmen crackdown. Beijing should cancel the third decade of this evil crackdown, and Washington should place extremely high priority on pressing Beijing for this purpose.

The China Support Network demands the release of Zhou and Liu and also Wang Bingzhang and Gao Zhisheng. Zhou and Wang gained U.S. permanent residency and each fathered children who are U.S. citizens. The China Support Network demands that their families be reunited.

Indeed, we will agitate in Congress for U.S. citizenship bestowed by an act of Congress. This is because the U.S. State Department, in our view, cannot be trusted to handle these cases appropriately in the absence of Congressional pressure.

And we certainly don’t trust the oddly-named “news media” to keep the spotlight on these cases or on other Chinese abuses. Indeed, any and all abuses from Communist China have been swept under the rug in recent years by the news media. Any global citizens who are anti-communist can share in our disgust at the U.S. news media.

Perhaps the complaints of the two preceding paragraphs should be rephrased into demands. The China Support Network demands that the U.S. State Department escalate the cases of Zhou, Liu, Wang, and Gao into top priorities in U.S.-China relations. And, the China Support Network demands that American news outlets -- such as the AP, CNN, and news divisions of ABC, CBS, and NBC – return to prominence the human rights conditions of Communist China.

Those abuses were prominent in the first decade after Tiananmen Square, and U.S. media did a lousy job in the second decade after Tiananmen Square. These media have become a rogues gallery of dubious departments. They have spent a decade avoiding candor about human rights in China, so this seems to be a challenging week for their copy writers. Will they let on that they know about these other abuses? : –

–The China Support Network demands the immediate end of the system of Laogai slave labor camps, and the immediate end of the system of Laojiao that is administrative detention in China.

–The China Support Network demands the immediate end of the crackdown on Falun Gong, and the immediate end of the practice of killing prisoners (including prisoners of conscience) for the sale of their organs in transplant surgery.

–The China Support Network demands the immediate end of the crackdown against Tibetans, and the immediate end of the crackdown against Uighur Muslims.

The ending of these crackdowns must include the release of the prisoners of conscience: innocent people who have been swept up in these dragnets employed by a Communist police state.

Of the news media, the China Support Network demands immediate exposure of our high-profile prisoner cases and abuses in these cases; we demand immediate exposure of Laogai camps and the Laojiao system; we demand immediate coverage of the crackdown against Falun Gong, and the practice of killing prisoners for the sale of their organs. We demand that the media follow up on the crackdowns against Tibetans and Uighurs. And, we demand to see the prisoners of conscience who are the subject of our concern above.

Will this week’s human rights dialogue be a stunning success – because they will stop the killing? Or, will it be an abject failure that highlights Sino-U.S. fecklessness and government inability to change its evil ways? That answer remains to be seen.

This is definitely an opportunity for U.S. policymakers and media to do the right thing. The importance of these talks cannot be overstated. The stakes are life and death.

However, the U.S. policymakers and media have two track records of doing the wrong things on these issues. The U.S. executive branch established its act in 1989. The blood at Tiananmen was barely dry when the U.S. executive pushed to renew Most Favored Nation status. They have never varied their act since then – U.S. China policy has been a tune with one note.

As a result, the China Support Network is “cautiously pessimistic” as it anticipates the outcome of this week’s talks. Communists should stop the killing. U.S. policymakers should stop the MFN. Media should report the killing. The killing only continues because all three groups have done the wrong thing. Shame on them!

Hu Jintao, tear down your evil empire!

2010-04-15T09:28:00.001+08:00

Commentary adapted from a rally speech, as delivered at Freedom Plaza in Washington DC, 4/11/2010

By John Kusumi

This week in Washington, President Barack Obama hosted President Hu Jintao on his visit here for the Nuclear Security Summit.

We are the rally of people who say, “Quit the Communist Party!” This is the group that has spent four or five years now informing Chinese people of the real history of the CCP, and making it possible for a growing wave of Chinese individuals to quit their association with the Chinese Communist Party.

Hu Jintao was in town and Barack Obama said to him, “Help us with addressing the issue of Iran.” And Barack Obama also said, “Please allow the value of your currency to float, so that you join the system of floating exchange rates.”

To me, these are good things in and of themselves — but perhaps misplaced priorities.

–Why isn’t Barack Obama telling Hu Jintao to end the system of Laogai slave labor camps?

–Why isn’t Barack Obama telling Hu Jintao to end the system of Laojiao that is administrative detention in China?

–Why isn’t Barack Obama insisting that Hu Jintao must immediately end the crackdown on Falun Gong?

–And Hu Jintao must immediately end the crackdown against Tibetans!

–And Hu Jintao must immediately end the crackdown against Uighur Muslims!

These are priorities that are a matter of life and death. It’s very easy for one man in the White House, who does not have to face the consequences, to ignore and to turn a blind eye to persecution, but in fact we are speaking of DEADLY persecution. These are matters of life and death!

And I believe it shows misplaced priorities on the part of Barack Obama to focus instead on–as he said–”Oh gee, help us to create some international action against Iran.”

In fact, why isn’t Barack Obama asking Hu Jintao to help on the matter of Darfur? We could use some more assistance from the international community in looking at the southern portion of Sudan, and saying to the Sundanese government–”Let’s be done with that genocide, and let’s make sure that we prosecute Omar Bashir.”

So I think that there are priorities that remain ahead of Barack Obama. He spent 2009 being very quiet on the human rights question. But now in 2010 we see a strengthening as he’s become a little bit tougher in his rhetoric with Communist China. He needs to become tougher still.

He needs to say to Hu Jintao the same things that we, in this rally, are saying to China and to Hu Jintao. We’re saying to quit from the Communist Party. In fact, perhaps the best thing that we could say to Hu Jintao is to TEAR DOWN YOUR EVIL EMPIRE!

This is a crowd that is aware of the persecution. We are awake to it. We know what is happening. We’re not fooled when there is news media that is sort of “La di da,” or that indicates, “Don’t worry, be happy.” –We don’t buy into that!

–We know that there’s killing, that there’s torture, there’s persecution, there’s administrative detention, there’s a violation of due process — the rule of law is nowhere to be found in mainland China! We know that they are off the page with their obligations to the international community — in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights; and, there’s a covenant on civil and political rights; and China is a signatory; and China breaks that covenant every day. Shame on China!

It is good to have Hu Jintao visiting Washington DC. This is a city where we can speak out, and say those things. We say, “Shame on Hu Jintao, if he does not end the persecution of Falun Gong.”

And in fact, the bottom line point that we really ought to say to Hu Jintao is “TEAR DOWN YOUR EVIL EMPIRE!” We’re not fooled; we’re not buying it; we insist that China must have its reform; its respect for human rights; its future of freedom and democracy and the rule of law.

That is our point that we insist upon. Thank you for taking in my speech, and I hope that you will join us in the coming days.

Shifting U.S.-China Policy Via Vigorous Protest

2010-04-10T19:31:00.000+08:00

The China Support Network recommends these three "events of the week" for anyone in the area of Washington, DC.

Sunday, 4/11

Freedom Rally Scolding China

A freedom rally will be held by the global coalition to Quit The CCP. Also known as the Tuidang movement, it began in 2005 to follow up on the publication of 'Nine Commentaries On The Communist Party,' a shocking book with the true history of China's Communist Party. From 2005 to the present, Chinese people have been urged to learn the truth and to separate themselves from the Communist Party by resigning from the CCP and from two related organs, the Communist Youth League and the Young Pioneers.

The movement maintains a website and database, and the counter has now recorded over 71 million resignations from Chinese Communism.

The rally "to recognize and show solidarity with the Chinese people that seek to embrace freedom" will be at Washington, DC's Freedom Plaza on Pennsylvania Avenue, between 13th Street and 14th Streets. It will run from 2 to 4 PM on Sunday, April 11.

The movement is a monument to the courage of Chinese people who have stood up against the most brutal and repressive regime in world history. This has been happening across all these years since 2005, when CNN refused to cover the first rally for one million Tuidang resignations. Hence, the movement is also a story that CNN can't handle; a testament to how CNN resists reality and clings to bogus synthetic narratives of its artificial reality.

Because CNN won't tell you these things, you can only get the story by attending events like Sunday's, and using your own eyeballs! --We would welcome you to join us.

Monday-Tuesday, 4/12-4/13

China's President Hu Jintao in Washington DC; Protestors in Washington DC!

U.S. President Barack Obama is hosting a Nuclear Security Summit in Washington, at which Hu Jintao will join 45 other world leaders in attendance. Here are four good reasons to protest: Tiananmen crackdown, Falun Gong crackdown, Tibetan crackdown, Uighur crackdown. Communist China also uses slave labor to manufacture sometimes-unsafe (quality challenged?) products, exports them to us, and competes unfairly against U.S. manufacturers who used to make American versions of such products. They take American jobs, enlarge the trade deficit, and use the profits against us for such purposes as building up their military, lending to the U.S. Treasury, and buying up U.S. assets.

This week, President Obama is saying, "stop the currency manipulation." Currency manipulation is economic dirty pool. It tilts the playing field (just like slave labor) and gives Chinese products an advantage over their American counterparts.

This week, we of the China Support Network are saying, "Stop the Tiananmen crackdown," "Stop the Falun Gong crackdown," "Stop the Tibetan crackdown," "Stop the Uighur crackdown," release prisoners such as Wang Bingzhang, Liu Xiaobo, and Zhou Yongjun, and abolish the systems of Laogai and Laojiao (those are systems of slave labor in Communist China).

Come out to protest, and help us deliver the message to Hu: Hu Jintao, tear down your evil empire!

Protesting will run from 9:00AM to 3:00PM. Free Tibet protestors will meetup at 8:30AM at Samuel Gompers Memorial Park [11th St NW, between L St NW & Mass Ave NW]
Summit venue: Walter E. Washington Convention Center
Address: 1207 9th Street NW (main entrance is Mt. Vernon b/w 7th & 9th Sts. NW)
Other tentative protest locations: Chinese Embassy & Mandarin Oriental Hotel where Hu will be staying

Thursday, 4/15

Human Rights Fair at George Mason University

On campus at George Mason University in Fairfax, Virginia, the China Support Network will exhibit at their third annual International Human Rights Fair, organized with the campus chapter of Amnesty International.

It's an all-afternoon outdoor trade show of human rights groups. The event will be held on Thursday, April 15th from 12:00pm – 5:00pm. George Mason University is located at: 4400 University Drive, Fairfax, VA 22030 We will be holding the event at the North Plaza outside of the Johnson Center and parking is available at the Mason Pond Parking Deck.

The week begins with loud and noisy events, and by Thursday the campus event is expected to be more quiet and mellow. But, we look forward to meeting and raising awareness among the GMU students who are not as tuned in to the activities of the human rights community. Perhaps we will line up new recruits for the next noisy occasion! :)

One Cheer for Barack Obama

2010-04-08T14:26:00.000+08:00

Protest season is starting early this year for the pro-Chinese democracy and anti-communist movement. Each year, April 15 memorializes the death of Hu Yaobang, the reformist Chinese leader who died in 1989 -- and whose death kicked off the Tiananmen Square pro-democracy movement. (Events proceed through April 17, when Chinese college students first marched into Tiananmen Square, up to June 4, the anniversary of the tragic Tiananmen Square massacre when the Chinese army finally used live ammunition to clear Beijing and Tiananmen Square of civilian protestors in that uprising.)

This year, April 12-13 will be the occasion of a visit to Washington DC by the Chinese Communist leader, Hu Jintao. (Hu will join Obama and 45 more national leaders for a Nuclear Security Summit.)

This means that it's time for protestors to head for Washington, or for the buses that will carry Free Tibet protestors from New York - Washington. The rumor mill says that Hu Jintao will stay at the Mandarin Oriental Hotel, and will meet with Barack Obama on Monday morning. The summit venue is the Walter E. Washington Convention Center. Protestors may also appear at the Chinese embassy.

Meanwhile, our headline commenced to say "One Cheer for Barack Obama." In truth, we can offer multiple cheers for recent actions of the Obama administration:

- Raising its rhetoric for internet freedom in China (backing up Google on their side of a dispute with Communist China);
- Choosing to support Taiwan's defense with arms sales;
- Meeting with Tibet's leader, His Holiness the Dalai Lama.

Those are three steps, short of trade sanctions, that seem to get tough on China. At the end of day, many previous administrations have scolded China, sold arms to Taiwan, and met the Dalai Lama. At the end of day, these steps are not very new. We've seen these postures from America before. So, when our headline offers One Cheer for Barack Obama, that's about something more than the mentioned three steps.

It is accurate to observe that the Chinese Communist Party has multiple contending high level factions, and seemingly, there is always a power struggle behind the facade of Communist unity.

Recently, Obama has chosen to get tough about Chinese currency manipulation, and that earns him one cheer from the China Support Network. (Could he earn two or three cheers from us? Yes, easily. Read on...)

We have described China's currency manipulation as economic dirty pool. It tilts the playing field, making American exports more costly and Chinese exports less expensive. It swells the U.S. trade deficit, current accounts deficit, and balance of payments deficit with China. The consequences of a trade deficit (for normal Americans) mean lower employment, downward wage pressure, and upward inflation pressure. As businesses based in America become less competitive with their Chinese competition, this hollows out the American middle class.

So. The currency issue speaks directly to the "War on the Middle Class," as experienced in America (also known as neo-liberal trade policy). Barack Obama can certainly have one cheer for getting tough in this department. Recent history on this issue includes,

- 2008: Campaign rhetoric was tough talk, promising to address China's currency manipulation.
- 2009: Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner wimps out and fails to name China as a currency manipulator.
- 2010: Obama wants to get serious on this issue. The Treasury was set to release a report on April 15. That report might name China as a currency manipulator, if Geithner doesn't wimp out again.

Late word is that the administration is delaying the release of the April 15 report, even though it is Congressionally mandated to say whether China is a currency manipulator. The change of timing is likely due to ongoing negotiations that the administration hopes will result in China's floating its currency.

This ties back to the internal power struggle of the Chinese Communist Party, alluded to above. One faction in China is sympathetic to the West's interest in fair competition and a level playing field. Within China, preparations have been made as if to implement a decision to float China's currency. So, one faction wants to pull the trigger, make the Yuan float, and play ball with the U.S. administration.

The other faction in China is dead set against raising the value of the Yuan. They fear the political instability that may follow social instability that may follow rising unemployment that may follow revaluing China's currency. In other words, they are dictators who would care to cling to power. We might call this "the unfair faction" in China, and call the others "the reasonable faction" in China.

The Obama administration is negotiating, perhaps wondering, "Hey -- what if the reasonable faction came to the fore?" As a digression, we at the China Support Network have been wondering that about China for 21 years.

This negotiating strategy of Obama's hopes for the reasonable faction to turn China into a reasonable player in world affairs. As long as this idea is on the table, the China Support Network would like to point out how Obama could amplify this gambit, and thereby earn "three cheers from the China Support Network."

- Urge the end of currency manipulation. (one cheer)
- Urge the end of Laogai and Laojiao, the Chinese systems of slave labor. (one cheer)
- Urge the end of the Falun Gong crackdown. (one cheer)

In each case, China has an internal power struggle, in which one faction is already prepared for China to shift course.

To abolish Laogai and Laojiao is an idea that has supporters at high levels, who have studied the issue and bandied around the idea of abolition.

And, the Falun Gong crackdown is a crime against humanity initiated by the previous President, Jiang Zemin. Recently, Jiang and his henchmen have been indicted by high courts in Spain and Argentina, for the persecution of Falun Gong. And the rumor mill now suggests that Jiang Zemin has been losing out in his power struggle with the Hu Jintao faction.

For the Falun Gong, it is a ray of hope to be aware that Jiang Zemin is finally on the way out of power, behind the scenes in China.

That means that it is now more realistic to urge that Hu Jintao must end the crackdown, the persecution, and the campaign of genocide that has been carried out against Falun Gong from 1999 to the present.

If Obama "gets on the page" to make these three demands of China, then we at the China Support Network would be far more inclined to say:

-- Three cheers for Barack Obama --

U.S.-China relations - prepared remarks by JPK

2010-02-23T20:43:00.002+08:00

I have been asked to speak briefly on U.S. China relations.

And for the invitation, I thank Tang Baiqiao, one of the strongest anti-communist student leaders from the June 4 uprising - the occasion in 1989 that led to the Tiananmen Square massacre.

Tiananmen Square was like a ton of bricks for Generation X; it was a savage atrocity, a crime against humanity, and an affront to Western sensibilities and American values.

On world television, we got to see the blood, the guts, and the gore from innocent Chinese in Beijing, while they bravely stood for freedom, democracy, and human rights.

It was not forgivable. It was a hideous turn of history, by the hand of evil.

United States China policy took a wrong turn, right then and there. One can say that United States China policy--itself--has been a hideous turn of history, by the hand of George Bush senior; and then by Bill Clinton; and then by George Bush junior.

America could have stood by its values, and stood by its anti-communism. That would have been the right thing to do.

Far from doing the right thing, the U.S. White House began to reward Communist China for bad behavior. The U.S. executive branch seemed to synchronize with the dictators of Beijing, like one hand washing the other.

Far from being curtailed, trade was renewed, and then expanded. This was wrong to begin with, and this remains wrong today. Communist China should be treated like the Soviet Union.

In the past month and a half, it has been heartening to see some stiffening in the spines of the U.S. White House and commentators. And public opinion polling remains anti-communist. Americans were 79% against the "permanent" normalization of trading relations (PNTR), and now they are 75% in favor of a Free Tibet, and staunchly on the side of Taiwan in its ongoing faceoff with Communist China.

Anti-communism never really went away, but it was eclipsed by the treasonous policy of three recent U.S. Presidents. Free trade finances military build up, and enriches China's communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs. It finances human rights abuse--crimes against humanity that will inevitably be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court.

And in some way, President Hu Jintao is in the same boat with President Barack Obama. Each has a predecessor who launched crimes against humanity. If Hu was an upright leader for China, he would correct the excesses of former President Jiang Zemin. Hu should prosecute Jiang for launching the Falun Gong crackdown with faulty justification.

And, if Barack Obama was an upright leader for America, he would correct the excesses of former President George Bush. Obama should prosecute Bush for launching a war of aggression with faulty justification.

Hu and Obama would have a good place in history if they would alleviate the flawed policies--and deadly outcomes--that they inherited in their national policies.

History is a funny thing. It's now 21 years since Tiananmen Square, and U.S.-China policy has been an abomination for every minute of those 21 years. --But, the history of these years has included establishment of the International Criminal Court. A new player has quietly made its entrance onto the world stage.

Jiang Zemin and George Bush acted like the ICC didn't exist, and like they could simply ignore its implications. The world will still come to appreciate the implications of the ICC: Genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity now have recourse. The wheels of justice may turn slowly, but they turn inexorably.

A brighter day is coming for the human rights community. There is a term for the Falun Gong crackdown. It is a bullshit crackdown. And, there is a term for the Iraq war. It is a bullshit war.

Presidents Hu and Obama are world leaders who could make a difference for the better; yet, China and America each need a course correction, and the correction has not yet come from those two offices. Does this mean that Hu and Obama would like to be in the dock with Jiang and Bush, facing justice about the same policies?

Since this is a Chinese democracy event, it is fitting to warn and to caution Beijing. We saw that Tiananmen crackdown; we know it was wrong. We see that Falun Gong crackdown; we see that Tibetan crackdown; and we see that Uighur crackdown. We know these are wrong.

And, it is fitting to appeal to Barack Obama: Stand with us in the face of history's largest humanitarian disaster: The rule of the Communist Party in China. Change is not optional.

In this movement, we will stand with humanity and demand justice. Thank you very much.

CNN Commits Sacrilege

2010-02-19T01:50:00.004+08:00

CNN Commits Sacrilege

By John Kusumi

It's Thursday, February 18, 2010, and U.S. President Barack Obama is hosting a meeting at the White House with Tibet's Dalai Lama.

Meanwhile, America's media of pawns, schills, and propagandistic sock puppets is completely dropping the ball in its coverage of this meeting.

Suppose that Russia kidnapped the Pope and offered a replacement, to be a pretender to the papacy? --The world, in its outrage, would ascribe no legitimacy to the pretend Pope. We know how Popes are selected (by a conclave of Cardinals), and that method is not by the fiat of Russian leaders.

Indeed, in the above example, the world would express shock, outrage, and demand that the situation be returned to the status quo ante.

For about a decade now, America's news media has been keeping the U.S. public "in the dark" and uninformed about the violations of human rights -- crimes against humanity -- that are perpetrated by the regime in charge of mainland China: namely, the Communist Party.

Above, for comparison, I've made a fictitious example where Russia kidnaps a Pope.

But, the analogy is to a completely true situation: China kidnapped the Panchen Lama, a high figure in Tibetan Buddhism, and offers a replacement, to be a pretend "new" Panchen Lama. And America's news media? --Having no shame, they are content to report about the new, replacement Panchen Lama.

Can you say sacrilege? Can you say no shame? --CNN and the Associated Press are both content to bamboozle the public, and then to pat themselves on the back with their self-congratulatory slogans about being "the most trusted name in news." In this vein, CNN's latest transgression was today, but let's consider the backstory.

On April 13, 2006, the China Support Network (grass roots boosters of China's pro-democracy movement) published "AP and Reuters assist in sacrilege." In there, I wrote:

No newswire is questioning whether or not Joseph Ratzinger is Pope Benedict XVI. He is that.
Tibetan Buddhism has the Panchen Lama. No newswire should be questioning whether or not Gedhun Choekyi Nyima is Panchen Lama XI. He is that.
The arrogance of journalism comes to the fore when some newswires arrogate to themselves the decision making authority over who is a figure in Tibetan Buddhism. The correct arbiter of same should be the Dalai Lama, not Christopher Bodeen of the Associated Press.

The Panchen Lama was kidnapped by China in 1995 at the age of 6, and became known as "the world's youngest political prisoner." The abduction itself is a hideous human rights abuse, and where there is no closure in this case, it is still correct to demand that Beijing release the Panchen Lama.

Again from my earlier article, "Beijing rejects both the Dalai Lama and his choice of the boy for Panchen Lama. No one in Beijing has the authority to choose a Panchen Lama, but they have gone ahead and selected their own boy so that they can "install" their own, pro-Beijing person to be a regime-friendly, pro-Beijing person."

In fact, I had written about the Panchen Lama's case in an earlier (2004) article:

Brazen is one word. Flagrant, heinous, and sacrilegious are three more words....his case clearly points out the diabolical nature of China's Communist regime, as it readily violates not just an individual, but a religious figure, and thereby the entire society that cares about the Panchen Lama. Violated and raped are two more words, and Tibet can understandably feel that way.

Back to 2006:

if the kidnapping was bad enough, then words begin to fail now, as we consider (a.) the arrogated selection, by Beijing, of a Panchen Lama impostor; and (b.) the fact that AP and Reuters today are reporting the impostor as if he is actually the Panchen Lama. I believe clearly that this is sacrilege, and that this is foul, faulty, and false reporting that serves only to [convey] Communist propaganda, while a crime against humanity is committed. Again, I am not Tibetan, and I am not Buddhist, but I can see a religion being violated, and I can see journalists arrogating to themselves something akin to the selection of the Pope.
History did not begin yesterday, nor did we fall off of a lemon truck yesterday. (Boy, don't journalists wish? In my lifetime, journalism has gone from "the first draft of history" to "the fictionalization of history.")
Reuters began its article by saying, "Tibet's 11th Panchen Lama, anointed by China's atheist Communists but not by the Tibet's Dalai Lama, took center stage at the World Buddhist Forum on Thursday, defending China's record on religion." (Hmmm. Why would China's record on religion need defending, if Beijing were not offending?)
Reuters continued, "Gyaltsen Norbu, appointed in 1995 as the Himalayan region's second most important religious figure after Beijing rejected the Dalai Lama's nominee...." (Hmmm. Recall from above that the Panchen Lama is named Gedhun Choekyi Nyima. The impostor, Gyaltsen Norbu, is being named here....)
The AP is in on this scam, too. Look at this quote from AP: "Gyaltsen Norbu, 16, is the second-highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism." AP described this appearance as "an apparent sign that Beijing is seeking greater acceptance for its choice of the Panchen Lama." However, we know from earlier that Gedhun Choekyi Nyima was previously reported to be the Panchen Lama. Whether the newswires agree this is sacrilege or not, a vast violation of estoppel it certainly is.
A vast violation of estoppel is a change of story; a reversal; an inconsistency. The AP did the same in 1989, when it reduced the casualty figures from the Tiananmen Square massacre. (Newswires earlier reported 3,000 dead; they later said "hundreds" dead, and CSN believes that change occurred at the behest of the propaganda minister in Beijing.) Beijing cannot make the China Support Network say what it wants, nor report Beijing's one-sided version of history. But apparently, Beijing can get the AP and Reuters to bend over backwards, and into a pretzel shape, in the course of their pandering, brown nosing, and general selling out to the Chinese Communist Party.
The AP went so far as to refer to "That other boy, Gedhun Choekyi Nyima," taking note of the dispute. AP also said, "A spokesman for the Dalai Lama on Thursday again rejected Beijing's right to make the final decision on reincarnations.
'Reincarnation is a religious belief and it cannot be decided by an administrative office,' Thubten Samphel said by telephone from the Tibetan government-in-exile's headquarters in the northern Indian town of Dharmsala."
This means that the AP is openly admitting that "their man" is an impostor, but they are reporting this story "the Beijing way," even without authority from the Dalai Lama. One might think they could at least have the decency to refer to the "Chinese Panchen Lama" as distinct from the "Tibetan Panchen Lama," and perhaps "Chinese Buddhism" as distinct from "Tibetan Buddhism." The rightful authority for Tibet and its Buddhism is the Dalai Lama, and the AP and Reuters stories again mix and blur the distinct concepts of Chinese versus Tibetan.
It's ugly, it's disgusting, it's slanderous, and it assists Beijing in committing a crime against humanity. To any thinking intellect, it is obvious propagandizing, and it is offensive to be assaulted with Communist propaganda while we Americans are merely sitting in our living rooms. Shame on these two newswires!

In short, the Chinese government is attempting an Orwellian revision of history, and the U.S. news media is helping Beiijing in that attempt to hoodwink the world and to foist their Panchen Lama selection upon the world. My 2006 article went on to say that newswires should retract and apologize for those stories.

Fast forward to 2010. What did we see on CNN this morning?

The video report was titled, "Objections to Dalai Lama visit," and was filed from Beijing by CNN's Emily Chang. Her script began as follows:

Thousands of Chinese worshipppers flock to the Lama Temple, praying for blessings. It's a shrine to Tibetan Buddhism. But, this isn't Tibet. It's Beijing, and this is a state-sanctioned temple. Over the years, the Lama Temple has become one of China's most popular tourist attractions. It's a traditional stop for national and international visitors, and an opportunity for the Chinese government to show the world it allows the practice of Tibetan Buddhism. Worshippers are required to recognize the Panchen Lama, chosen by the Chinese government, rather than the Dalai Lama, the exiled Tibetan spiritual leader. Some don't seem to worry about the difference.

If this is journalism, it is one-sided journalism. Now they're stacking the bogus Panchen Lama, not against the real Panchen Lama, but against the Dalai Lama himself. Chang's report glosses over the real Panchen Lama entirely -- it skips the entire controversy! She then says, "Some don't seem to worry about the difference." --Okay well logically, if some don't worry, that implies that others do. (In fact, the first "some" could be a tiny minority, and the second "some" could be a vast majority.) So, will both sides be illustrated in this report?

No. The other side of the matter is people concerned about human rights and religious freedom. This report refers to no one from the pro-freedom, pro-democracy, pro-human rights community of dissidents and 'Free Tibet' campaigners. They don't appear. Who appears instead?

Folks, I start a new paragraph here because I am truly incredulous. --A street vendor of incense becomes the new guest on CNN!

Folks, it's another paragraph break because I am boggling. At stake are international relations, freedom, democracy, human rights, and the religion and culture of Tibet. And who gets face time on CNN? --A street vendor of incense! She says:

"Average Chinese people have no opinions on the Dalai Lama and what he does," this incense vendor says. "We just care about having enough food to eat and clothes to wear. Not politics. That's the government's business."

There is such a thing as the international human rights community, but CNN seems to be foggy about their existence. They could have inserted spokespeople from Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, the China Support Network, or Students for a Free Tibet. Or, how about America's labor unions, which lost jobs to Communist China? None of that appears in this report! What was illustrated is that "some don't seem to worry about" the substitution shell game -- the controversy, wherein Beijing kidnapped the Panchen Lama and now promotes its own choice of replacement.

Let's have a recap of words that apply to what we're seeing, per my article above.

- brazen
- flagrant
- heinous
- sacrilege
- foul
- faulty
- false
- pandering
- brown nosing
- general selling out to the Chinese Communist Party
- ugly
- disgusting
- slanderous
- assisting Beijing in committing a crime against humanity
- Orwellian revision of history
- one sided journalism

Obama, Dalai Lama, and Yahoo! in our news

2010-02-13T08:07:00.001+08:00

President Set to Meet Dalai Lama, while

Chinese Dissidents Target Yahoo!

Feb. 12, 2010 (CSN) -- The United States has confirmed that President Barack Obama will meet with Tibet's exiled leader, His Holiness the Dalai Lama XIV, this coming Thursday in Washington, DC.

The meeting will occur over the objections of the Chinese government, which invaded, occupied, and colonized Tibet after the Chinese Communist Party won the Chinese civil war in 1949.

China claims the right to govern Tibet, while history (since 1391) has included fourteen incarnations of the Dalai Lama who traditionally rules Tibet as a theocracy of Tibetan Buddhism.

The current Dalai Lama fled into exile in India at age 23 (in 1959) and has been responsible for the Central Tibetan Administration, a government-in-exile based in Dharamsala, India.

Meanwhile in Tibet itself, the Chinese government rules with an iron fist, imposing crackdown after crackdown and a human rights environment characterized by killing, brutality, and oppression.

Abortive uprisings have been followed by additional crackdowns, the latest in 2008. As seen in a video documentary about the 2008 uprising, the China Support Network responded to that crackdown by demanding that China "Stop the killing, release the prisoners, and talk to the Dalai Lama."

See http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fxmlYqkH8Q

Since then, the Chinese government has held a series of insincere negotiations with representatives of the Dalai Lama. The most recent talks broke down on February 1, 2010.

The Chinese government has objected strenuously to this Obama meeting with the Dalai Lama, threatening that this will "damage Sino-U.S. relations." However, the same step was taken by the previous President, George W. Bush, so it should not surprise Beijing that U.S. Presidents continue their tradition of meeting with the Dalai Lama.

The protests by the Chinese government can therefore be seen as rote, routine, and ritualized, following the traditional script from their tired old canons of propaganda.

The Dalai Lama is actually one of the strongest pro-Chinese democracy figures on earth, and enjoys warm relations with many Chinese dissidents. He understands that the success of the Chinese democracy movement would spell relief for Tibet.

The issues of freedom, democracy, and human rights will be squarely in the hands of U.S. President Barack Obama in this upcoming meeting. We can only hope that Obama does not fumble the ball or punt on first down, as he did in 2009.

Chinese Dissidents Target Yahoo!

The China Democracy Party World Union (CDPWU), based in Flushing, New York, is contemplating a class action lawsuit against Internet giant Yahoo!, and is seeking out those with complaints against Yahoo to prospectively join in the class of plaintiffs.

Yahoo! has some history as a whipping boy of the Chinese democracy movement. They were roundly criticized when the Chinese government imprisoned journalist Shi Tao, based on personally identifiable information that was rendered by Yahoo! to the Chinese government upon request.

The dissident writer Liu Xiaobo then wrote an open letter to Yahoo! founder Jerry Yang, with lengthy and articulate excoriation that amounted to a slow roast and a public shaming of Yang. Yahoo! was also criticized in Congressional hearings about how Internet giants are providing technology to assist repression in China.

In a gesture of atonement, Yahoo! provided funding for the Laogai Museum, a facility that opened in November 2008 under the hand of Chinese dissident Harry Wu, who is also responsible for the Laogai Research Foundation.

See http://chinademocracy.blogspot.com/2008/11/laogai-museum-opens.html

--However, we can note that while the Laogai slave labor camps are one human rights issue, it is a separate and distinct issue from that of technological repression and Internet censorship -- another human rights abuse from the same government of Communist China.

Chinese dissidents continue to worry about technological repression and Internet censorship, since this human rights abuse is ongoing.

China Democracy Journal, a publication of CDPWU, is usually published entirely in Chinese. But in their latest issue, they took the unusual step of providing an English translation of their lead article on the front page: "Yahoo.com Represents China Communist Government to Do Spying Around the Globe."

Based on their journalistic sources, the article speculates on a possible "secret deal" made between Yahoo! and the Chinese government. The perceived deal includes (a.) more rendering of personally identifiable information from the accounts of Yahoo customers and clients; and (b.) Yahoo support for a Chinese government initiative against anonymity on the internet.

The article continues, "In addition, the spying deal also prescribes that China Communist Government will transfer the Chinese market left behind by Google.com to Yahoo.com, as rewards to Yahoo.com for representing spying for them."

In January, 2010, Google raised awareness of cyber attacks believed to be from the Chinese government. Those attacks specifically targeted the GMail accounts of human rights activists. Google suggested that it may leave the Chinese market.

In China Democracy Journal, the article says, "Some readers implied that their Yahoo email boxes are supervised and stolen, possibly guilty deeds of Yahoo.com." That is to say that human rights activists are finding that their Yahoo email accounts may be compromised.

Based on its history with Yahoo! and the fact that journalist Shi Tao continues to sit in prison right now, suffering the consequences of Yahoo!'s indiscretion, it is understandable that the Chinese democracy movement would be suspicious and distrustful of Yahoo!.

China Democracy Journal invites readers to "combine with many cyber victims to accuse Yahoo.com of criminal behaviors and ask compensation from Yahoo.com." It concludes, "We warmly welcome people to call our office to register so that we can hand in the case together and bring the criminal to the court." Their contact information is at http://cdjweb.org.

China Policy 2010: Hooray for Arlen Specter!

2010-02-04T04:19:00.000+08:00

Feb. 3, 2010 (CHESHIRE, CT) -- The six weeks following Christmas, 2009 have been topsy-turvey, turbulent times both for United States / China relations and for the Chinese pro-democracy movement itself. It is now time for review, analysis, and recommendations from the China Support Network.

In Washington, DC of the U.S. it becomes evident that China policy 2010 will be nothing like China policy 2009. What changed in between? The 2009 Climate Change Conference of the UN -- a summit in Copenhagen, Denmark in mid-December, was an occasion where China maneuvered high-handedly, and this served to block the achievement of a world agreement, which failed to materialize at that summit. U.S. President Barack Obama may have felt personally snubbed by China's Premier Wen Jiabao.

Also in mid-December, as reported by Google, a series of cyber attacks, believed to be from the Chinese government, targeted Google servers (including GMail accounts of human rights activists) and those of other U.S. firms.

Of course, China has its own problems, and policy irritants, that pre-date December 2009. The persecution of Liu Xiaobo and Zhou Yongjun extends back and originated 20 years ago, as deadly force was used to clear Tiananmen Square of Chinese citizens in their pro-democracy uprising of 1989.

Above ground in mainland China, the Chinese democracy movement has not been seen much in the years since 1989. --But the intervening years have seen a 500,000 person rally in Hong Kong, and a 2 million person rally in Taiwan, and a large number of Tiananmen Square student leaders finished their college educations in the United States. Also in the U.S., more senior Chinese dissidents (Wei Jingsheng, Harry Wu, Xu Wenli) have been exiled after their release from Chinese prisons.

In fact, the United States is a hotbed of the Chinese democracy movement. Falun Gong practitioners have been active in the U.S., and they came to be hardline anti-communists, due to their ongoing persecution -- a holocaust which still needs to stop -- back in China. Hardline dissidents formed a transitional China Interim Government, to be a government-in-exile standing by. Two of the four original officers were U.S. based.

And in the United States, the above groups mingle freely with protestors of Taiwan, Tibet, East Turkestan, Mongolia, and oppressed peoples of other lands such as Vietnam, Laos, North Korea, and Burma. Wei Jingsheng has helped to form a pan-asian pro-democracy alliance.

In the recent time frame, on December 25 the Chinese government sentenced Liu Xiaobo to 11 years' imprisonment. His crime? --Writing a tract / petition / manifesto called Charter 08, for the political reform of China in the same style as Charter 77, which was an effort by dissidents in the former Czechoslovakia to resist Communism of the former Soviet sphere.

Then, on January 15, the Chinese government sentenced Zhou Yongjun to 9 years' imprisonment. His crime? --Trying to return to China to visit his aging / ailing parents.

For both Liu and Zhou, what's notable is that we're now 20 years after the fact of Tiananmen Square's bloody massacre of thousands, seen on world TV. Liu and Zhou have both been political prisoners twice before -- and still the persecution continues! The Chinese government has taken out a lease for a third decade of persecution in the Tiananmen crackdown.

The new year of 2010 began with its first news item: a pro-democracy protest in Hong Kong. In fact, protests have continued, demanding the release of Liu Xiaobo and support for Charter 08 and investigation about the "secret rendition" of Zhou Yongjun from Hong Kong authorities to mainland authorities, the precursor to Zhou's trial and recent sentencing. On January 13, Hong Kong's Legislative Council debated a resolution in favor of Liu Xiaobo.

Ominously, on January 11 the Chinese regime arrested Zhao Shiying, another signatory to Charter 08. The original group was of 303 signers, from all walks of life including past or present officials in the Communist Party. --How many of these people will be caught in a dragnet? Clearly, mainland authorities have tried to signal a hard line and to intimidate the Chinese democracy movement by way of their heavy handed treatment for Liu, Zhou, and Zhao recently.

On January 12, while Haiti's earthquake took the world's attention, Google released "A new approach to China." This was outing the Chinese government for its cyber attacks and announcing that Google would no longer toe the line for the regime by censoring its results on Google.cn. In Beijing, human rights activists sent flowers to the offices of Google's headquarters there.

Flowers were not the only repercussion to the Chinese cyber attacks. U.S. Rep. Chris Smith (R-NJ) promoted his Global Online Freedom Act, and U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton correctly seized upon the occasion to speak out for Internet freedom on January 21. Where previously, we would have said that Google had "crossed over to the dark side," this change of heart seemed like "coming back from the Sith," and Google was hailed as heroic by energized human rights campaigners.

On January 24, the Wall Street Journal editorialized that campaigners are right -- Hong Kong's special status under the "one country, two systems" arrangement is compromised by how Zhou Yongjun was handed over to mainland authorities, contrary to routine procedures which would have returned him to the United States, where he has permanent residency and two U.S. citizen children. Yet more dissidents, and rights in Hong Kong, may be in jeapordy -- the legal precedents in this case are ominous.

What happened to "one country, two systems?" We want Zhou Yongjun back, and we want Liu Xiaobo freed. There is a point of good news: On January 25, the Washington Post reported that Zhao Shiying was freed after two weeks of being held. Also during January, the problem of poison diary products returned in China -- evidently, the milk powder from the last poisoning was not thoroughly destroyed, and it found its way back onto the market.

On January 25, Reuters published 'Factbox: Sources of tension between China and U.S.' as a helpful resource for those who need a score card. If you are a busy world leader and can't remember your place in the story, that's also why the China Support Network releases this article. Feel free to use it as a crib sheet or Cliffs Notes.

On January 28, Hillary Clinton met Chinese Foreign Minister Yang Jiechi, asking China for cooperation at the UN to place stiff new sanctions on Iran. She was also expected to raise the Internet freedom / Google cyber attacks issue.

On Friday January 29, the United States announced that it will sell $6.4 billion worth of weaponry to Taiwan. The sale is said to include 114 Patriot advanced capability (PAC-3) missiles, 60 Blackhawk helicopters, and two Osprey-class mine-hunting ships. Beijing responded by cancelling military visits between the two country's armed forces, and with a threat of sanctions against related U.S. companies.

Those related companies include Sikorsky Aircraft Corp (United Technologies), Lockheed Martin; Raytheon; and McDonnell Douglas (Boeing).

On Monday, February 1, talks broke off between Beijing and envoys of the His Holiness the Dalai Lama (temporal and spiritual leader of Tibetans and Tibetan Buddhism), with no progress nor agreement on the Tibet issue. On Tuesday, February 2, the White House announced that President Barack Obama will meet with the Dalai Lama. This occasioned another blustery day from Beijing's propaganda department.

Also Tuesday, U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair said that recent cyber attacks on Google were "a wake up call." And U.S. Senator Dick Durbin raised the issue, noting that he has asked 30 companies, including Apple, Facebook, and Skype, about their human rights practices in China. "Google sets a strong example in standing up to the Chinese government's continued failure to respect the fundamental human rights of free expression and privacy," Durbin said.

Frustrated Communist leaders may be thinking, "But wait! These are all of our hot buttons!" CSN would note that these are long simmering issues, which were kept invisible by U.S. cheerleaders for China during the warmer period of Sino-U.S. relations. Pendulums also swing back, and the now-boiling issues are precisely the reason why the Sino-U.S. honeymoon may now be over.

Strength with Beijing will generally be applauded among exiled pro-democracy Chinese dissidents. For a decade, we have lamented with horror and dismay that the U.S. seemed to abandon its anti-communist back bone, giving commercial service priority atop such matters as freedom, democracy, human rights, and national security. For Chinese dissidents and human rights campaigners, the new climate may seem electrifying -- attention is going to issues that we have long fought to raise!

The wake up call was long overdue, and we are now treated to the interesting sight of the U.S. establishment, waking up on the China issue. It seems that prevailing editorial winds shifted to now blow against China, around the same time that arms sales to Taiwan were announced on January 29. On February 2, Foreign Affairs -- published by the Council on Foreign Relations -- posted an article by Yang Yao, headlined 'The End of the Beijing Consensus' and subtitled, 'Can China's Model of Authoritarian Growth Survive?'

It is also true that the Taiwan arms sales and the Dalai Lama meeting were "as expected." The U.S. does this routinely, and did so under the previous Bush administration. Chinese leaders cannot credibly claim to be shocked and surprised, unless one looks at the reaction of Google and the Internet freedom issue that has been kicked up as a consequence of Chinese cyber attacks. --Really, Google is the new element in the mix of issues that we are seeing at present. Google marked the tipping point.

On Wednesday, February 3, Barack Obama met with Democratic Senators. He was confronted by Sen. Arlen Specter (D-PA), who asked:

-----
"We have lost 2.3 million jobs as a result of the trade imbalance with China between 2001 and 2007. The remedies to save those jobs are very ineffective -- long delays, proceedings before the International Trade Commission, subject to being overruled by the President. We have China violating international law with subsidies and dumping -- really, a form of international banditry. They take our money and then they lend it back to us and own now a big part of the United States.

"The first part of my question is, would you support more effective remedies to allow injured parties -- unions which lose jobs, companies which lose profits -- by endorsing a judicial remedy, if not in U.S. courts perhaps in an international court, and eliminate the aspect of having the ITC decisions overruled by the President -- done four times in 2003 to 2005, at a cost of a tremendous number of jobs on the basis of the national interest. And if we have an issue on the national interest, let the nation pay for it, as opposed to the steel industry or the United Steel Workers.

"And the second part of the question, related, is when China got into the World Trade Organization, a matter that 15 of us in this body opposed, there were bilateral treaties. And China has not lived up to its obligations to have its markets open to us, but take our markets and take our jobs. Would you support an effort to revise, perhaps even revoke, those -- that bilateral treaty, which gives China such an unfair trade advantage?"

-----
The President answered Senator Specter, saying:

"Arlen, I would not be in favor of revoking the trade relationships that we've established with China. I have shown myself during the course of this year more than willing to enforce our trade agreements in a much more serious way. And at times I've been criticized for it. There was a case involving foreign tires that were being sent in here, and I said this was an example of where we've got to put our foot down and show that we're serious about enforcement. And it caused the usual fuss at the international level, but it was the right thing to do.

"Having said that, I also believe that our future is going to be tied up with our ability to sell products all around the world, and China is going to be one of our biggest markets, and Asia is going to be one of our biggest markets. And for us to close ourselves off from that market would be a mistake.

"The point you're making, Arlen, which is the right one, is it's got to be reciprocal. So if we have established agreements in which both sides are supposed to open up their markets, we do so and then the other side is imposing a whole set of non-tariff barriers in place, that's a problem. And it has to be squarely confronted.

"So the approach that we're taking is to try to get much tougher about enforcement of existing rules, putting constant pressure on China and other countries to open up their markets in reciprocal ways.

"One of the challenges that we've got to address internationally is currency rates and how they match up to make sure that our goods are not artificially inflated in price and their goods are artificially deflated in price. That puts us at a huge competitive disadvantage.

"But what I don't want to do is for us as a country, or as a party, to shy away from the prospects of international competition, because I think we've got the best workers on Earth, we've got the most innovative products on Earth, and if we are able to compete on an even playing field, nobody can beat us. And by the way, that will create jobs here in the United States.

"If we just increased our exports to Asia by a percentage point, by a fraction, it would mean hundreds of thousands, maybe millions of jobs here in the United States. And it's easily doable.

"And that's why we are going to be putting a much bigger emphasis on export promotion over the next several years. And that includes, by the way, export promotion not just for large companies but also for medium-size and small companies, because one of the challenges -- I was up in New Hampshire yesterday, and you saw this terrific new company that had just been started up -- it's only got 13, 14 employees at this point. But it has a new manufacturing technique for the component parts in LED light bulbs, potentially could lower the price of LED light bulbs, cut them in half.

"And these folks, they potentially could market not just here in the United States, but this is a technology that could end up being sent all around the world. But they don't have the money to set up their own foreign office in Beijing to navigate through the bureaucracy. They've got to have some help being over there. And so that's one of the things that we really want to focus on in this coming year, is making sure that our export-import banks, our trade offices, that we are assisting not just the big guys, although we do want to help them, but also the medium-sized and small businesses that have innovative products that could be marketed if they just got a little bit of help and a little bit of push from the United States government."
-----

Later in the day, CNBC debunked the President's claim about how many jobs would be added if the U.S. increased its exports by 1%. The numbers fall short and do not come out at the level suggested by the President. Meanwhile, U.S. China trade has been a net minus of at least 2.3 million jobs, and the trade deficit is a net minus in the ballpark of a quarter-trillion dollars yearly.

In fact, the China trade policy means that stimulus in Washington stimulates the economy of China, where they also enjoy the multiplier effect as a quarter trillion dollars recirculate in the Chinese economy. China trade is a net minus for U.S. jobs, wealth, and taxpayer dollars (and weakens the dollar and adds inflation pressure and weakens U.S. wages / incomes).

Dated February 4 in Australia, The Sydney Morning Herald reports that OECD, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development "has added to the pressure on Beijing to revalue its currency."

A story by Tom Gjelten posted by NPR on February 3 concludes,

"As politicians, both Democrat and Republican, take greater note of conflicts with China, U.S.-China policy could become a hot election issue.

"'[In 2008], we voted for Obama or McCain with no interest in their positions on China,' Bremmer notes. [Ian Bremmer, president of the Eurasia Group] 'I believe that that will never happen again. This relationship is going to become politicized, and going forward it is going to be key in determining how we think about candidates, how we think about U.S. policy.'"

Right now, your author at the China Support Network is suppressing an urge to order a lawn sign for political campaigning: "* * Duncan Hunter 2012 * *". America's highest office should have a China hawk, not a China wimp. I suppress that urge in the interest of being constructive here and now.

As ever, the China Support Network is standing by with suggestions for Washington and demands for Beijing. The suggestion is to be a China hawk, not a China wimp. Consider these demands for Beijing (and, more advice for Washington will follow below):

-----
China must abolish slave labor, and the systems of Laogai and Laojiao. (For newbies, Laogai is the Chinese gulag of slave labor camps. Laojiao is the procedure of administrative detention, by which people are sent to the labor camps with no due process of law.)

Persecution of Falun Gong is not a simmering issue; it is a boiling issue, and it must stop.

For that matter, all Maoism must cease immediately. The China Support Network demands the full implementation of all 19 points in Charter 08:

1. Amending the Constitution.
2. Separation of powers.
3. Legislative democracy.
4. An independent judiciary.
5. Public control of public servants.
6. Guarantee of human rights.
7. Election of public officials.
8. Rural–urban equality.
9. Freedom of association.
10. Freedom of assembly.
11. Freedom of expression.
12. Freedom of religion.
13. Civic education.
14. Protection of private property.
15. Financial and tax reform.
16. Social security.
17. Protection of the environment.
18. A federated republic.
19. Truth in reconciliation.

About Tibet, CSN has demanded that Beijing "stop the killing, release the prisoners, and talk to the Dalai Lama."

Beijing should likewise reverse its 2009 crackdown against Uighur Muslims in East Turkestan, which it calls Xinjiang province.

The taboo against discussing 1989's Tiananmen massacre must be lifted. The government must provide a full accounting to the families of victims, and the perpetrators must be brought to justice. All remaining Tiananmen-era prisoners must be freed, together with Wang Bingzhang, Gao Zhisheng, and co-founders of the China Democracy Party. China should also release any jailed journalists and bloggers, religious practitioners, and prisoners of conscience of any kind (including the ethnic minority "separatists").
-----

As I consider advice for Washington, I'd note that for all the many crises and problems that are now faced by the Obama administration, that those are known quantities. Between Washington and Beijing, Beijing is standing on more egg shells, or faces a more daunting minefield of challenges.

Beijing was looking forward to playing a new hand of cards, perhaps thinking that the United States was crippled by its crises while China enjoys rising stature in the world. They tipped that hand, or they played those cards too soon. Beijing cannot withstand a shoving match with the United States at this time.

Hence, my advice to Washington is, stand strong. Support the demands above, and be willing to sanction China for currency manipulation and slave labor, both of which amount to "economic dirty pool," a way in which Beijing has taken advantage of Washington's largesse.

Support the Global Online Freedom Act, and feel free to sell Taiwan the F-16s that it wants to replace older fighters. Meet with Chinese dissidents and [Uighur leader] Rebiya Kadeer, not just the Dalai Lama. Get ready for a second Cold War, because even if we don't have that with China, we will need that with Iran. Remember that free trade is for the free world. Cut out the communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs.

Word from here.

China Support Network Condemns Zhou Yongjun's Sentence of 9 Years in Prison

2010-01-20T20:16:00.001+08:00

Another Chinese government act with no justification,

explained only as sheer political persecution

A CSN statement authored

by John Kusumi, CSN founder
January 20, 2010

Through newswires, the world has just learned of the jail sentence handed to Tiananmen Square student leader Zhou Yongjun, in a case that represents the triumph of gangsterism over the rule of law in Communist China. By arbitrary fiat, the Chinese government rendered a sentence that is unjust and purely political. This arbitrary punishment of Zhou Yongjun is supported only by political enmity -- a grudge -- rather than by law or merits in the case at hand.

This may also be an attempt by the government of China to remind the Chinese people that they are not free. The Constitution of the People's Republic of China ostensibly protects (in Article 35) freedom of speech, of the press, of assembly, of association, of procession and of demonstration. In Article 36, it protects freedom of religion. And in Article 41, it protects the "right to criticize and make suggestions to any state organ or functionary."

To its people and to the international community, the Communist Party (CCP) is displaying to one and all that they hold themselves above the Constitution. Observers can infer the following message: "Don't take seriously those rights from Articles 35, 36, and 41. If you rely on the Constitution, you may end up like Zhou Yongjun or Liu Xiaobo or Wang Bingzhang or Gao Zhisheng." The CCP is also thumbing its nose at international law, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, to which China is a signatory.

The Chinese government has also repudiated its former leader, the late Deng Xiaoping, in multiple ways as will be expressed below. By undoing reforms of Deng Xiaoping, the current leadership of China has taken a step backwards towards Maoism.

In the particular case of Zhou Yongjun, we know that he lived in the United States from 2002-2008, and was attempting a return to China when he was intercepted by Hong Kong authorities, who oddly performed a "secret rendition" of Zhou -- handing him over to Mainland authorities in contravention of standard procedures and the "one country, two systems" formula which is meant to protect rights in Hong Kong.

The present case is therefore ominous for Hong Kong as well. And, the author of the "one country, two systems" concept was Deng Xiaoping. Hence, we see the first way in which today's action contravenes Deng.

The Associated Press correctly noted that "Details of the charges against Zhou remain murky." The AP also noted that the charge was "attempted fraud." The charge itself implies an unconsummated transaction. There is no charge of actual fraud, merely of "an attempt." So, there is no actual crime; Zhou stands accused of attempting one.

Let's reiterate: Zhou stands accused of attempting a crime. But, Zhou was not in China from 2002-2008, and he was intercepted before he set foot on Chinese soil. Zhou could not have committed a crime on Chinese soil; Zhou could not even have attempted a crime on Chinese soil; at the time of his accused attempt, Zhou had yet to set foot on Chinese soil! That is why Zhou's attorneys have argued that Mainland China authorities lack jurisdiction even to prosecute the allegation of the attempt of which Zhou stands accused.

The prosecution of Zhou Yongjun was a grasp on top of a reach after a stretch. Mainland authorities lack jurisdiction to bring this case, but they did so anyway -- and they went to the extreme of illogic in convicting Zhou, and now they have sentenced him to nine years in prison. (And, they slapped him with a fine of 80,000 yuan.)

The Eighth Party Congress called for a well structured legal system, and Deng Xiaoping advocated the rule of law and championed Chinese legal reform. The illogic in the Zhou Yongjun case highlights Chinese authorities' departure from the rule of law. Prior to Deng, China experienced Maoist legal nihilism, and now it's 1977 all over again. This is the second way in which today's action contravenes Deng.

Of course, we know that the real grudge of the Chinese government is due to the Tiananmen Square uprising of 1989, where Zhou Yongjun was a prominent leader. The only message that observers can read out of the CCP's conviction and sentencing of Zhou is one of mindless self-assertion such as, "We're lawless, we're given to gangsterism, and we get away with it!"

It is true that Chinese Communist leaders get to do their misdeeds with no parental supervision. And that circumstance is regrettable, because these authorities need some other authorities to check against their lawless exploitation of the Chinese nation.

Just as with the Tiananmen Square crackdown, the China Support Network (CSN) condemns this persecution, prosecution, conviction, and sentencing. And, the CSN calls upon Chinese authorities to release Zhou Yongjun and political prisoners similarly situated; and CSN calls upon the international community such as the UN, EU, and US to apply pressure and sanctions to the Chinese government until such time as this Tiananmen Square persecution has ended.

Hong Kong Clamor: "Release Liu Xiaobo!"

2010-01-08T23:08:00.005+08:00

Hong Kong Clamor:
"Release Liu Xiaobo!"

January 8, 2010 (CSN) -- The human rights community is affronted and outraged at the arbitrary sentence for Chinese dissident writer Liu Xiaobo, of 11 years' imprisonment, which was handed down by Chinese authorities on Christmas Day, December 25, 2009.

In Hong Kong, activists have slated actions to occur on January 10, 12, and 13 -- on the 13th, the Hong Kong Legislative Council will take up the matter.

The following write up of the activities comes from Patrick Poon, a veteran activist in Hong Kong. He reports, "We are outraged that the Chinese government defies appeals to release Liu Xiaobo. We are organizing the following activities to continue demanding the immediate release of Liu Xiaobo."

1) Collect signatures to “Demand Release of Liu Xiaobo” and “Support Charter 08”

Date: 10 January 2010 (Sunday)

Time: 1pm – 6pm

Venue: Jardine Bazaar, Causeway Bay

2) “Release Liu Xiaobo” Candlelight Vigil

The Legislative Council is going to debate the motion “Releasing Liu Xiaobo” on 13 January 2010. We are going to hold a candlelight vigil on the previous evening. See details below:

Date: 12 January 2010 (Tuesday)

Time: 7pm – 9pm

Venue: Open area outside Legislative Council (facing the Prince’s Building)

Rundown:

- Speeches by representatives of participating organisations

- Reciting the poems written by Liu Xiaobo and poems about Liu Xiaobo

- Action art performance

- Free speeches by participants

- Singing human rights songs

Participating organizations: Independent Chinese PEN Centre, Hong Kong Chinese PEN Centre, Hong Kong Journalists Association, International Federation of Journalists, Amnesty International, Inmediahk.net, Hong Kong University Students’ Union, Hong Kong Christian Institute, China Human Rights Lawyers Concern Group, Justice and Peace Commission of the Hong Kong Catholic Diocese, HKFS Social Movement Resource Centre (smrc autonomous8a), Hong Kong Alliance In Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, Laogai Research Foundation

3) Support the “Releasing Liu Xiaobo” motion outside the Legislative Council

Date: 13 January 2010

Time: 10:30am (The Legco meeting will start at 11am)

Venue: Protest zone outside the Legislative Council

Protesting the Sentence of Liu Xiaobo

2009-12-29T15:17:00.000+08:00

WHAT: Protest the 11-year prison sentence imposed on
Liu Xiaobo by the government of the Peoples Republic of China

WHEN: Tuesday, December 29, 2009 2:00 p.m.

WHERE: Consulate of the Peoples Republic of China
42nd Street & 12th Avenue , New York , NY 10036

CONTACT: Ann Noonan 646/251-6069
Jonathan Cao 917/292-7348
Dr. Anna Cheung 516-708-3985

SPEAKERS INCLUDE: Dr. Wang Juntao, Prominent June 4th dissidents, masterhand on the June 4th 1989 democratic movement; Mr. Hu Ping, Beijing Spring Magazine Chief Editor, famous writer and political analyst;
Mr. Chen Pokong, Writer, former June 4th 1989 democratic movement leader at Guangzhou

Background: Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in prison for calling for political reform in China through a manifesto called Charter 08. He has already been in detention in China for a year, and his 2-hour trial ended on Christmas Day with a guilty verdict.

“We continue to call on the government of China to release him immediately,” US embassy official Gregory May told reporters outside the courthouse following sentencing. “Persecution of individuals for the peaceful expression of political views is inconsistent with internationally recognized norms of human rights.”

In 2008, while human rights supporters throughout the world prepared to celebrate the 60th Anniversary of the International Declaration of Human Rights, Liu Xiaobo, one of China's most prominent human rights activists was arrested in his home in Beijing. His crime was drafting a document, Charter 08, which calls for political reform in China . His telephone and internet lines were cut, and his personal papers, books and computers were seized.

Charter 08 reiterates many of the rights as set forth in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It calls for democratic reform in China and it calls for change in 19 areas, including a new constitution, an independent judiciary, freedom of assembly, election of public officials and stronger guarantees for personal freedoms. It expresses a sense of urgency for the future and destiny of China . The document has more than 8,000 signatories including intellectuals and human rights activists, lawyers, journalists, dissidents, artists and rural leaders in China .

Charter 08 was based on Charter 77, a human rights manifesto which challenged Soviet rule and was originally signed by about two hundred writers and intellectuals in Czechoslovakia in 1977. One of the signers of Charter 77 was playwright Vaclav Havel who later became the first President of democratic Czechoslovakia after the 1989 "velvet revolution". Charter 77 serves as an example of how Czechoslovakian dissidents who signed the Charter 77 petition changed history when they stand up for what they believe.

PRC: Merry Christmas, Here's 11 Years In Prison

2009-12-25T15:22:00.001+08:00

The Chinese government is making a big issue out of Charter 08. The method by which the regime of the Communist Party is escalating Charter 08 is by once again showing their true colors as communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs -- demonstrating their rule by arbitrary fiat, in contravention of norms and standards of international human rights such as those in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights -- to which the Chinese government is a signatory. They have sentenced the famous dissident Liu Xiaobo, known as a co-author of Charter 08, to spend the next 11 years in prison.

The China Support Network condemns this flagrant outrage; calls for the PRC/CCP government to release Liu Xiaobo; calls upon the U.S. State Department and the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama to intervene and to apply pressure to the Chinese government for the purpose of securing the release of Liu Xiaobo; and, CSN calls upon the Chinese people to implement the recommendations of Charter 08. Don't wait for Liu to be free. Don't wait for the Communist Party to move. Don't wait for the American government to move. Charter 08 must be heeded now, and implemented beginning at once.

For researchers who will write about the Chinese democracy movement, the sentence for Liu Xiaobo is an historic turn in the story. And now, the Chinese government has clearly pointed out that which they would suppress: Charter 08. The abuse of Liu Xiaobo is a clear indicator that the CCP fears Charter 08 and its influence upon society.

Liu Xiaobo became prominent as a leader in Tiananmen Square's uprising of 1989, for which he became a political prisoner (twice previously). He has been prominently visible as a writer, an intellectual, and a leading dissident voice. And one year ago, he was involved in the preparation of Charter 08, a document whose release was timed to coincide with International Human Rights Day on December 10, 2008.

As described by the group, Human Rights In China,

"Charter 08 is an open appeal to Chinese authorities to promote legal reform and political democracy and guarantee human rights. It was issued by 303 Chinese individuals from all walks of life, including writers, scholars, lawyers, journalists, workers, peasants, entrepreneurs, and retired Party officials, to mark the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. It sets forth 19 specific recommendations, including constitutional reform; separation of administrative, legislative and judicial powers; freedom of association, expression, and religion; and civic education based on universal values and civil rights."

Charter 08 started with 303 co-signers, and later attracted thousands of signers as an internet petitiion. A Facebook group for Charter 08 has 1,251 members. On Twitter, @freeliuxiaobo has 397 followers.

Two notable features of Charter 08 are (1.) its call for the end of one-party rule -- the monopoly on power currently held by the Chinese Communist Party; and (2.) it follows the pattern of Charter 77 in Czechoslovakia. Charter 77 was an effort by anti-communist dissidents in Czechoslovakia to change their country during a time when it was still dominated by Soviet Communism. Due to the first aspect, Charter 08 directly challenges Communist Party rule in China; and, due to the second aspect, Charter 08 is not just a document; it's a movement.

Liu's current case began when authorities arrested him two days before the release of Charter 08, on December 8, 2008. His formal arrest was announced on June 23, 2009. Human rights groups such as Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, and the China Support Network unanimously condemned the arrest and detention of Liu Xiaobo, as did governments of the US, EU, and Canada. On Twitter, @freeliuxiaobo has 397 followers. His formal indictment was rendered on December 10, 2009, International Human Rights Day.

As the trial approached, Charter 08 signatories began to appeal on the internet, with a petition saying, "We Are Willing to Share Responsibility with Liu Xiaobo." Ding Zilin of the Tiananmen Mothers urged fellow signers of Charter 08 to gather outside the court "to be part of the trial." Ding Zilin -- who lost her 17 year old son in 1989's crackdown against the Chinese democracy movement -- has maintained prominence by issuing very statesman-like appeals for justice on each anniversary of the Tiananmen crackdown. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called for the Chinese government to have dialogue with the Tiananmen Mothers.

In addition, Bao Tong, a former top Communist Party official who also signed Charter 08, warned that a guilty verdict "will be nothing other than a stripping away of citizens' right to freedom of expression, publication, association, protest, and demonstration. It will mean nothing less than an announcement that the Constitution is null and void."

On Wednesday, December 23, 2009, the two hour trial was held behind closed doors at the Beijing No. 1 Intermediate People's Court. Authorities prevented many people from entering the courtroom to attend the trial: Liu Xia, the wife of Liu Xiaobo, was kept out, as were about one dozen diplomats from the US, Europe, and Canada; and, about two dozen Charter 08 signers who had answered the call of Ding Zilin to attend the trial; and, some number of journalists. No verdict, nor sentence, was announced on Wednesday.

The verdict and sentence were then announced on Friday, December 25, 2009, Christmas Day. For "incitement to subvert state power," Liu Xiaobo is sentenced to spend 11 years in prison. Liu will turn 54 years old on December 28, 2009. The sentence suggests that Liu may be 65 years old when next he has his freedom, although this trial really indicates that "freedom" does not exist for Chinese citizens, even when outside the walls of a prison.

As a matter of analysis, we should note that Charter 08 is an entirely non-violent effort to shine a light on solutions for Chinese society. In fact, the Chinese democracy movement has both "hardline" and "moderate" wings. Perhaps the difference between the two camps is the difference between revolution and evolution. Charter 08 called for a significant evolution in the Chinese polity and political structures. Some in the hardline wing criticized Charter 08 for being "way too moderate."

Perhaps the hardliners feel, "never mind a 'significant evolution,' let's have a significant revolution." And now, the case of Liu Xiaobo demonstrates the oppression and the arbitrary rule-by-fiat which is practiced by the Chinese government. The case is an excellent example of the reason why hardline Chinese dissidents feel as they do -- and why they say "tuidang" (Quit the Party) and why they established the China Interim Government to be a dissident group waiting in the wings.

Once again, the Chinese government is testing the outer limits of how much abuse the people will tolerate. And, no matter whether they hail from the moderate wing or the hardline wing, Chinese dissidents will be united in calling for the freedom of Liu Xiaobo.

Why did President Obama...fail so much in China?

2009-11-20T15:46:00.001+08:00

Barack Obama, often portrayed as a change agent, changed nothing in his recent visit to China as the U.S. President. Heck, he didn't even bring back a Panda, much less any freed prisoners of conscience!

Feckless on human rights, Obama may also prove to be feckless on the economy, because a better U.S. economy begins with recalibrating U.S.-China policy.

Whether we speak of human rights or speak of the economy (or speak of the communist agents who were passed off as college students in Obama's "town hall" in Shanghai), Obama displayed a blithe lack of awareness for the state of affairs between the U.S. and China.

And now, Wei Jingsheng is calling out Barack Obama about these matters. Wei, often described as China's most famous dissident, lives in the United States since his 1997 release from 18 years' imprisonment in Communist China.

---=== (drumroll) ===---

Why Did Obama Come Back from China Empty Handed?
-- Wei Jingsheng

What we all have been most interested in this week, is US President Obama's visit to China. That is because we all had great expectations of this US President's visit.

Chinese at home or Overseas have hoped that President Obama could do something regarding Chinese human rights. Ever since Hu Jintao came to power, the human rights situation in China has been deteriorating. Many people have been arrested, put in jail, and abused. Those who are out of jail also experience more pressure than in the past, to the degree that it is hard to breathe. The Chinese Communist regime controls the media, blocks the Internet, and tightens the room of speech. The Chinese people more than ever wondered if the US president could help them to reduce some of the pressure. In the past, the pressure from a US president always had some effectiveness, because the Communist regime is most afraid of the human rights diplomacy of the USA.

It seems Americans care most about the exchange rate between the US dollars and the Chinese currency RenMinBi. This is the key to reducing the trade deficit. Even 10 years ago, most of Americans already knew that the unfair trade system would increase the trade deficit and thus result in unemployment. But some politicians who were bought out by the big business enterprises forced the passage of the Most Favored Nation status (later on named Permanent Normal Trade Relationship to reduce the attention and pressure) for the Communist regime. At that time, the Americans still enjoyed a pretty good life with a trade deficit of less than 57 Billion dollars, so most Americans took it. After all, we have to respect the democratic system and respect the law.

But now, the US economy has deteriorated with increasing unemployment and depression in every corner. The trade deficit between the USA and China has skyrocketed to more than 268 Billion dollars. Many Americans know that is due to the fact that the Chinese government manipulated the currency exchange rate, in addition to an unfair trade system. Just as the US senator Charles Schumer pointed out: the whole economic crisis started with the Chinese government's manipulation of the Chinese currency. If we do not solve this root problem, other efforts are meaningless.

Yet, President Obama did not bring back anything from China. The United Kingdoms' Times article today has a title: "President Obama returns home from visit to China almost empty handed". This result is indeed totally out of people's expectations. When the strategic advisors in the White House designed the topics for Obama, they felt that these core issues are hopeless. So they left a lot of room to play, such as environment, troops in Afghanistan, etc, even to the details of Iran's nuclear facility. They were not even expecting any substance from the Chinese Communist regime, but simply wanted to express its attitude on these issues.

But President Obama did not even get these issues done in China. In the human rights front, he did not even get the Chinese government to release a few political prisoners just to make a show. Hu Jintao really did not give Obama any face, not even a human rights show, except to waste Obama's trip to China. In comparison to the previous a few terms of not so successful presidents of the USA, Obama seems to be the least successful in dealing with China.

Not mentioning conservative news media, even news media that lean to the left such as the Washington Post published commentaries strongly criticizing Obama for not doing anything to reduce the trade deficit. It went so far as to review the Permanent Normal Trade Relationship that President Clinton signed for China, and narrated in detail how the huge increase of the trade deficit with China is the result of politicians and businesses selling out America. If we read these words in the past, we might have thought the Post was a Republican newspaper attacking the Democrats.

Why did President Obama, who could give eloquent speeches is so popular in Europe, fail so much in China? We could name a list of reasons, but there are two root reasons. One is that he and his advisors do not know either China, or the Chinese. They thought that they are dealing with a democratic country. The diplomacy between democratic countries is the diplomacy of gentlemen. If you release a signal of kindness, then the other must return with the same. Or we could use a popular way to describe it as a "cooperative diplomacy of mutual compromises and mutual benefits."

However, if you ever hear an American president referring to the Chinese Communists as a cooperation partner, then you know that they do not know about the Chinese Communist Party at all. Even those Western diplomats who speak good Chinese do not know that this "cooperation partner" is an error of basic concept. The logic of the Chinese Communist Party is a "philosophy of struggles" that believes "when the enemy retreats, we shall invade". If you retreat, it will believe you are afraid of it. If they do not take a step forward, they will be teased within the Communist Party, even be attacked as a result. In dealing with the Chinese Communist Party, it is totally wrong to practice this spirit of compromise and cooperation that the Western democratic societies are accustomed to. So if we view the stand that Obama offered to China before his trip, we could tell that his visit would come to a total failure.

The second most important reason is the impedance from the business community. The biggest beneficiary of the trade deficit with China and unemployment in the USA is big business in both America and China. Ever since many years ago, these businesses have voluntarily defended the interests of the Chinese Communist party. In these issues of unfair trade and manipulation of currency, they share the interests of the Chinese Communist Party. Just ten years ago, they were already able to manipulate both the US Congress and the US administration to the degree that they went against the desires of the majority citizen voters in the USA. Even with the prerequisite of being unable to hide from the public, they were able to pass a resolution that the majority of voters were against and thus offered free trade to the Chinese Communist Party unilaterally. Now, their benefits are already 4 or 5 times more dependent on business, so the average voters have even less power to against them. Even President Obama has a hard time to go against the businesses' will. This is one of the root reasons that the US President had to put down his posture in front of the Chinese Communists.

Therefore, the US-China relation is not just an issue of economy, or Chinese human rights. It is already testing the Western democratic system. Both Adolf Hitler and Joseph Stalin were unable to dissolve the Western democratic system, yet the current Chinese Communist Party is in its effort to realize Lenin's wish: to make the "American imperialism" be the last stage of capitalism. It seems to be successful so far. This is why this one time visit of the America president to China received so much attention from the people. People are not only caring about the issues of currency exchange and unemployment. People are concerned mainly if the Western democratic system as represented by the USA will be defeated by an autocratic Communist system.

The ZYJ Case: No verdict, lots of coverage

2009-11-19T22:51:00.003+08:00

A hearing was held today in Shehong County Court, in Suining of Sichuan Province, for "ZYJ" or Zhou Yongjun, the prominent Chinese dissident who once led the Tiananmen Square uprising. Chinese authorities have held Mr. Zhou arbitrarily without trial for over a year, and today was the overdue trial.

No verdict was announced at the end of the five-hour hearing.

For an array of press coverage about today's action, see the following links.

Times Online: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article6923192.ece

Reuters via Washington Post: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/19/AR2009111901506.html

Associated Press: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5ih_hP1LWb_3qhbcM1onJF6W1XpHgD9C2JNI00

DPA: http://www.earthtimes.org/articles/show/295437,dissident-handed-over-to-china-by-hong-kong-goes-on-trial.html

China Policy Still Lousy

2009-11-17T20:03:00.003+08:00

#ObamaFAIL:
U.S.-China Policy
'Still Lousy After All These Years'

During Obama's visit, China quietly sets a trial for Tiananmen Square student leader Zhou Yongjun
- Trial to occur Thursday, one day after Obama leaves China -

By John Kusumi

This is a newsbreak, coming to you from the China Support Network. Yes, it's more than 20 years after the Tiananmen Square pro-democracy uprising and massacre of civilians at the hands of the Chinese army. But never mind that; Communists, dictators, tyrants, and thugs continue to rule China, and they still don't know when to quit, or when to stop persecuting the participants of the pro-democracy uprising that was led by Chinese college students back in "Spring Semester, 1989."

In fact, Communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs have slated more such persecution to be coming up this week -- one day after U.S. President Barack Obama leaves China. During this week's presidential summitry, China has quietly scheduled a trial to be held on the morning of Thursday, November 19 2009, in Shehong County Court [in Suining] of Sichuan Province.

They will put on trial Tiananmen Square student leader Zhou Yongjun, who is now in his third stint as a prisoner of Mainland Chinese authorities. Zhou was previously a political prisoner from 1989-1991, and from 1998-2001. When he is not a political prisoner, Zhou is a U.S. permanent resident who lives in California and has two U.S. citizen children.

The China Support Network has worked as part of RAZY, the Rescue Alliance for Zhou Yongjun, during much of 2009. Zhou's case has been submitted to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention; we have held press conferences in New York and Hong Kong; and, we have allied with Hong Kong legislator (and Chairman of the Democratic Party) Albert Ho to pressure Hong Kong Chief Executive Donald Tsang to explain why Hong Kong authorities performed the arbitrary detention of Zhou -- followed by the secret rendition of Zhou to authorities of Mainland China.

(For CSN's web page that chronicles the Rescue Alliance, see http://www.chinasupport.net/CSN/razy.aspx
)

Now, let's have ourselves a thought exercise which might reasonably be called hypothetical conjecture.

Could there be a reason why the American people are distrustful of government? --And a reason why they distrust their news media? Let's conjecture that freedom and democracy matter to the American people, and that human rights are important.

In its day, the Tiananmen massacre was an eye opener. Indeed, it was a jaw dropping atrocity by the hand of evil. More than eye opening, it was eye popping. At that time, Pew Research found that 45% of the American public was "closely following" the political turmoil in China, which was all over the news for months. It was entirely reasonable that some American college students set up the China Support Network; the Tiananmen massacre was an occasion similar to other vast tragedies in the news -- Hurricane Katrina and the Asian tsunami come to mind as eye popping tragedies that played out on world television. For all of these tragedies, many relief efforts sprang up, and the China Support Network was initially just one more effort, among many, to help the cause of the "laobaixing," the common people of China.

Americans would have seen the uprising populace of China as similar to the people of Poland or East Germany or Czechoslovakia. The people were oppressed by Communism and were demanding their freedom. Clearly, that is a cause that Americans can support. Americans could support a rebuke for Tiananmen Square, but not George H.W. Bush, who was then the U.S. President. His policy was loudly criticized by many commenters. There are freedom loving people. There are anti-communists. And then, on the other hand, there is George H.W. Bush (who can be called Bush-41).

The policy of Bush-41 can be summarized thusly: "La Di Da. Mass murder is just fine, or A - OK." For freedom loving Americans, this policy is unacceptable.

The administration had a blind eye for the Tiananmen massacre, but the news media did not, at that time. Tiananmen Square student leaders escaped from China and came to the United States and began working with the China Support Network. The discontent with Bush's China policy continued all the way to the next presidential election cycle, when a challenger named Bill Clinton invited Chinese dissidents to the Democratic National Convention of 1992. That convention was addressed by not one, but two Tiananmen Square dissidents. Bill Clinton vowed that he would "not coddle tyrants, from Baghdad to Beijing," and promised specifically that he would renew China's MFN trade status only with linkage to progress on human rights.

Clinton's promises were "more like it." The tougher stand with China is what the American people wanted, and it contributed to the election defeat of Bush-41, who became a one-term President, and the victory of Bill Clinton. Once he was in office, Bill Clinton threw away his earlier playbook -- he double crossed the Chinese dissidents by breaking his campaign promises -- and Clinton's policy became, like that of Bush-41, "La Di Da. Mass murder is just fine, or A - OK." For freedom loving Americans, this policy remains unacceptable.

To have such easy countenance for mass murder, I believe that it doesn't take a village. It takes an evil, bloodthirsty monster. Bush-41 and Bill Clinton both qualify as evil, bloodthirsty monsters -- in my book.

To the degree that Barack Obama inherits and continues that China policy, and acts just like it's Bill Clinton's third term, then I believe that he also inherits the designation--from me--of being an evil, bloodthirsty monster.

The mass murder of Communist China is not acceptable; the easy countenance of the United States to overlook the Tiananmen massacre is not acceptable; and, the China Support Network has said it well in a prior statement, and we repeat it here and now:

"All Maoism must cease immediately."

Because there is such distance and disconnect -- between a freedom-loving policy as at CSN on the one hand; versus the evil bloodthirsty monster policy of the U.S. administration on the other hand; this leads to the headline on this article, which begins with a hashtag, "#ObamaFAIL," and which headline says: "U.S.-China Policy 'Still Lousy After All These Years'."

And the news media? --is very obviously comprised of buffoons, sociopaths, and propagandists. I've called U.S. television news people "bent, craven, depraved sock puppets managed by a corrupt cabal," and today let's add an additional designation, namely that of being evil, bloodthirsty monsters. At least for myself, when I see faces of people such as Hillary Clinton and Chuck Todd, I imagine the blood of innocents drooling out of their mouths, over their lips, and down their chins. To watch American TV news in the present day is to gaze directly into the faces of evil.

The American people have very good reasons to turn off their televisions and to boycott CNN and other networks. To watch the news is only to watch sociopaths at work; if one has a low tolerance, or not much stomach for sociopaths, then it is best to avoid America's TV news channels.

To my reader, thank you for reading to the bottom of this thought exercise, which might reasonably be called hypothetical conjecture -- as long as freedom, democracy, and human rights are only window dressing for the United States of America. If rights mattered, the news media would revolt against a China policy that is akin to its very own crime against humanity. As it stands, I think that every newscast of theirs -- if excluding the Chinese democracy movement -- is a crime against the American people. (And indeed, sending Americans' jobs to China is a crime against the American worker, so the White House has got crime in progress too.)

# # #

CSN publishes letter to Obama re: China trip upcoming this month

2009-11-05T12:43:00.002+08:00

China Support Network

President Barack Obama
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, DC 20500

November 5, 2009

Dear President Obama,

The China Support Network is aware that you will visit China soon. We are a human rights group with a long history of solidarity with Chinese dissidents and their pro-democracy movement seeking reform in Mainland China to include freedom, democracy, and human rights.

Our work began in 1989, as American college students witnessed the eye-popping atrocity of Tiananmen Square’s crackdown and massacre, by troops of the Communist Party, which still runs China today with no freedom, no democracy, no human rights, and no accountability nor justice for the victims of that among other crackdowns.

A current of thought says that U.S. politicians lose sight of the forest for the trees. They get lost in the weeds of issues. What happens if we step back and look at the top line of Mainland China’s experience under the Communist Party-led regime founded by Chairman Mao?

When the Maoism has passed, the history will be written. And, history will neither be kind to that regime, nor to the pliant Baby Boomer Presidents of the U.S. who turned a blind eye and gave Chinese Communists a nod and a wink to tacitly bless their disregard of human rights.

When the history is written, the reign of Maoism – including three recent successors to Mao – was the world’s largest humanitarian disaster ever, anywhere, bar none. For the number of untimely deaths caused by the regime, credible estimates range from 65 million to 80 million dead.

That is larger than the death toll of World War II. The Chinese Communist regime is the world record holder in mass murder. As we observe this situation and the unforgiveable U.S. China policy which followed Tiananmen Square, there is a lack of situational awareness that smacks of George W. Bush during Hurricane Katrina.

Observing the scene, one might conclude that at the U.S. White House, there is no such thing as a humanitarian emergency; and that in U.S. newsrooms, there is no such thing as a humanitarian emergency. But, history knows, and history will tell.

Will you appear on the right side or the wrong side of history? Will Wolf Blitzer appear on the right side or the wrong side of history?

The tenures of yourself and Blitzer reflect either an absence of situational awareness, or a deliberate choice to feign an affected nonchalance. That is to say, a blind eye, a deaf ear, and a choice to see no evil, hear no evil, and speak no evil may in fact be willful on your part. However, you each have ongoing tenure, hence may yet appear on the right side of history.

We urge you to do so, and to stop the trade deficit which the U.S. runs with Communist China. When the Maoism has passed, the Chinese leaders must answer for genocide and crimes against humanity. And the indifferent leaders of the Western world will need alibis or plausible deniability, lest history record them as accessories during the fact of genocide.

You will soon visit China. If you follow in the footsteps of Bill Clinton, you may be wheeling and dealing to enlarge, rather than reduce, the U.S. trade deficit which robs the U.S. economy of jobs and purchasing power. That trade deficit ought to be categorized as a crime against the American worker, while it also finances genocide and crimes against humanity at the other end of the trade.

Again, we urge you to reduce and then eliminate the trade deficit. The health of the U.S. economy requires at least balanced trade, if not a surplus.

Do we want a Reaganesque, "Tear down this wall" speech? –It would be a step in the right direction.

Short of that, we urge you to speak up for prisoners of this cause. Zhou Yongjun and Liu Xiaobo are leaders from the Tiananmen Square action, again suffering deprivation of their liberties -- over 20 years after that historic occasion. When in exile, Zhou is based in California, has U.S. permanent residency, and applied for citizenship. He has two U.S. citizen children.

Wang Bingzhang is the father of the China democracy movement overseas and referred to as China’s Nelson Mandela figure. When in exile, Wang is based in New York, and he has four U.S. citizen children who have not seen their father since 2002.

Gao Zhisheng is an attorney famous for taking on cases of the persecuted (e.g., Christians and Falun Gong practitioners) and referred to as China’s Conscience. The regime has vengefully persecuted Gao in reply, and he disappeared on February 4 of this year. His wife and two children fled to safety in the United States.

President Obama, reunite these families! It’s the right thing to do; it would be a step in the right direction; it would give Wolf Blitzer something to talk about; and thereby enable his redemption.

The China Support Network has its own message that might be delivered to China, that "All Maoism must cease immediately!" Thank you for taking in our missive. May God bless America and China both.

Sincerely,
/s./ John Kusumi, President
The China Support Network
http://www.chinasupport.net

2009-10-13T07:35:00.002+08:00

CSN updates of October 13, 2009

RAZY rises to lodge objections in Hong Kong

The Rescue Alliance for Zhou Yongjun, co-founded by the China Support Network, held another news conference Monday -- this time, in Hong Kong.

Zhou Yongjun (also known as Majer Zhou) was an early bird -- fast off the mark -- as the first student leader in the uprising at Tiananmen Square -- an occasion in 1989 that led to the army crackdown against demonstrators, who were seeking freedom, democracy, and human rights in Mainland China. Students elected him the first Chairman of the Autonomous Students' Federation of Beijing Universities, the group which initially ran the Tiananmen Square protests.

Zhou, now legally a permanent U.S. resident, is presently in the custody of Mainland Chinese authorities in the Suining district of Sichuan Province, for his third stint as a political prisoner in Mainland China. The authorities have lodged trumped-up charges accusing him of financial fraud, even though Zhou lived in the United States and could not have committed any crime whatsoever in the jurisdiction of the Mainland, on Chinese soil.

He was arrested by border police of Hong Kong as he tried to enter there in September, 2008. He had been motivated by the declining health of his aging parents, and by the devastation of the Sichuan earthquake which struck his hometown in early 2008. He was travelling with a false passport, purchased from an immigration company, bearing the name Wang Xingxiang.

Monday's news conference highlighted a peculiar aspect in this human rights case: The case is one of arbitrary arrest and detention. But, there are really two complaints which can be lodged with two governments: Hong Kong performed the arbitrary arrest, and then with no legal basis nor proceedings whatsoever, handed Zhou over to Mainland China, which continues the arbitrary detention.

As a result, RAZY is lodging Zhou's case with the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention, but in addition there is an effort by lawyers in RAZY to focus Hong Kong attention on the baseless rendition of Zhou, performed by Hong Kong authorities in flagrant disregard of international human rights, the judicial independence of Hong Kong, and normal procedures.

Newswires covered Monday's news conference, and they noted the normal procedures and how they have been violated in this case. In the Reuters story--

"Hong Kong, a former British colony that returned to Chinese rule in 1997, enjoys a high degree of autonomy and a separate judicial system under its mini-constitution, the Basic Law, but critics say the case of Zhou Yongjun sets a worrying precedent....

"Extradition of individuals from Hong Kong to China remains rare, while the Basic Law obliges authorities to "safeguard the rights and freedoms" of all those in the city....

"The Hong Kong government responded to the incident in a statement by saying anyone with an invalid travel document would be 'repatriated to his or her place of embarkation or origin'.

"It wasn't made clear, however, why Zhou was not sent back to Macau or the United States where he is normally resident."

The AP quoted RAZY co-founder Li Jinjin, a dissident Chinese attorney who was himself a Tiananmen Square student leader, as saying "Zhou was sent to China without legal basis. Hong Kong is responsible."

On the DPA newswire, Hong Kong "has a separate legal and political system and a mini-constitution that guarantees freedom of speech and political freedoms. Extraditions to China are rare."

Albert Ho, the head of Hong Kong's Democratic Party, joined the news conference. On the AFP newswire, Ho said, "Hong Kong does not have a rendition treaty with mainland China so should not have transferred dissident Zhou Yongjun to the Chinese city of Shenzhen in September last year."

On the AP newswire,

"Hong Kong, a former British colony, was returned to China in 1997, but the territory retains separate political, legal, economic and immigration systems from the mainland. It also lacks a deportation and removal treaty with mainland China.

"They are totally disregarding the obligations under the law," Albert Ho, a Hong Kong pro-democracy lawmaker who is helping with Zhou's case, said of Hong Kong authorities. "It seems the government is acting on the direction from China."

On the Reuters newswire, Ho said, "This possibly constitutes a very serious infringement of (Zhou's) rights, which is guaranteed in the Basic Law," and added, "He was taken back against his will to China for trial or investigation."

On the AFP newswire,

"'We are pressing for the government to explain why it sent him (Zhou) to the mainland,' said Ho, who is acting as a lawyer for Zhou and his family.

"Ho said he was also asking to see police records for Zhou's case.

"Zhou, who is being held in a detention facility in his home province of Sichuan, has been charged with defrauding Hong Kong's Hang Seng bank, Ho said."

Zhou's girlfriend Yuewei Zhang also featured prominently in the coverage. On the AP wire,

"'I am here with our little girl to look for Daddy,' said Zhang Yuewei, Zhou's girlfriend and the mother of his young daughter. 'It's Hong Kong's government who sent him to mainland China.'...

"On Monday, Zhou's girlfriend carried a portrait of him as she marched with other supporters to Hong Kong's government headquarters. They called on Hong Kong leader Donald Tsang to explain why Zhou was turned over to Chinese officials, a possible violation of the territory's laws, and asked for help securing his release."

On the DPA wire,

"At a press conference Monday, his girlfriend and mother of his young daughter accused the Hong Kong government of sending Zhou to China where he is detained in Sichuan....

"Girlfriend Zhang Yuewei said Zhou's family only learned of his arrest and detention in Sichuan seven months after he was placed in custody in mainland China....

"His girlfriend and lawyer said there is a political motive for trying him in Sichuan rather than in Hong Kong where the alleged offences took place."

On the Reuters wire,

"Zhou, a former student leader from the 1989 Tiananmen Square pro-democracy movement in Beijing, travelled to Hong Kong from Macau last September under a false identity, but was held and transferred by Hong Kong officials to police in the South China city of Shenzhen, his girlfriend and lawyer told reporters.

"'Zhou Yongjun went missing in Hong Kong and the Hong Kong government sent him to China, leading to him being detained till now,' said Zhang Yuewei, Zhou's girlfriend."

Speeches mark 60 million resignations from the Chinese Communist Party

A rally was held on October 4 on the Boston Common to salute the progress of the Tuidang (Quit the Party) campaign. In the past four years, it has recorded 60 million statements of Chinese people leaving the Communist Party and related organs such as the Communist Youth League.

"Nobody believes in communism anymore," said CSN's John Kusumi in a speech at the rally. In another speech, Boston-based campaigner Michael Tsang listed the sins of the Communist Party (a partial list) and then considered the stance of U.S.-China policy.

In Tsang's speech, it's about more than "whether the U.S. is going to be displaced as the economic power of the world, or increasingly lose its military edge. My concern is whether America continues to lead the world in freedom and democracy. We are increasingly condoning all of this and in danger of losing our standards without our realizing it. Not cognizant of their [CCP] tactics, we are conceding to them rapidly on every front."

More on the Boston event can be found as follows.

Article in the Epoch Times:

http://www.theepochtimes.com/n2/content/view/23483/

Kusumi speech in CSN's blog:

http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/10/prepared-remarks-of-oct-4-2009.html

Tsang speech in CSN's blog:

http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/10/speech-by-michael-tsang.html

China marks a different occasion with the number 60

On October 1, the regime of the Chinese Communist Party turned 60 years old.

At the China Support Network, nobody celebrated. Instead, we co-sponsored a protest prepared by REAL at the Chinese Embassy in Washington, DC.

That protest heard speeches from organizer Jeffrey Imm and from Timothy Cooper, the Executive Director of Worldrights.

An article about that protest appears at the URL below, and we thank Jeffrey Imm and REAL for the co-sponsorship.

http://www.realcourage.org/2009/09/protest-dc-china-embassy/

Bao Tong reviews the PRC at 60

Bao Tong was a political aide to ousted chief Zhao Ziyang. (Zhao was a Communist Party leader who took the side of the students in the Tiananmen Square matter, and was deposed by the hardliners who won the power struggle in 1989. Zhao lived under house arrest for 16 years until his death in 2005.) Bao lives under house arrest in Beijing, and he wrote an essay for the October 10 occasion of Taiwan's National Day.

Bao may have written the best summary of the past 60 years in Mainland China. Bao said the last 60 years of “glorious” Communist rule contained “a big lie.”

“In the first 30 years, tens of millions either died of starvation or were ‘struggled’ to death under the banner of revolution,” he wrote.

“In the second 30 years, anyone standing up for civil and constitutional rights, for religious freedom, for ethnic autonomy has been declared an enemy of the people en masse, all in the name of stability.”

Bao also praised Taiwan's model of government, and as reported by Radio Free Asia, Bao said that "reunification should occur on the basis of Taiwan’s system of government, not China’s."

U.S. campaigners discuss Falun Gong and CDP

2009-09-25T10:56:00.009+08:00

A providential coincidence in modern Chinese history:

Falun Gong and CDP

By Timothy Cooper, Executive Director, Worldrights

A providential coincidence of modern Chinese history may have aligned the strategic interests of two profoundly important but different groups of persecuted Chinese nationals who have suffered the same unhappy fate. Ten years of unrelenting state-sponsored repression against two sets of innocent nationals—one political, the other nonpolitical—may have, ironically, set the stage to potentially advance the well-being of both in the common cause of ending unchecked human rights oppression in China.

These two independent groups—linked only by national identity and vitality of purpose as well as their common faith in a more benign future for China—include courageous exiled leaders and mainland supporters of the China Democratic Party (CDP), together with the well-organized and intelligent members of the Falun Gong, which boasts more members worldwide than the entire Chinese Communist Party.

The near simultaneous emergence of the two on the Chinese landscape ten years ago, with CDP rising peaceably to register as an opposition party to advance prospects for political pluralism in China, and the gentle practitioners of the Falun Gong appearing silently and respectfully at Zhongnanhai headquarters in Beijing to protest the beatings of forty fellow members in Tianjin, generated lightening-like repression by former president Jiang Zemin, leaving a tsunami of human suffering in its shocking wake.

Despite international diplomatic interventions on behalf of both CDP and Falun Gong, the long season of oppression against them, as well as others, remains in full flower. In early September 2009, CDP dissident Xie Changfa was sentenced to 13 years in prison for “subverting state power.” He was convicted of attempting to organize a national meeting of the outlawed CDP in Hunan province—nothing more. On May 23, Falun Gong practitioner Li Min died at the age of 51 in Daqing Prison in Harbin. Reliable information suggests that he was denied proper medical attention after suffering a likely stroke. Evidently, he was also tortured. Tortured for practicing the art of qigong.

Astonishingly, even after all these years, Chinese leaders still fear Falun Gong practitioners’ benign language of tolerance and compassion; they persist on making enemies out of legions of otherwise kind and gentle citizens. And after sixty years of unbroken challenge to Communist Party monolithic rule, they go on recoiling at CDP’s not unreasonable call to advance the vital cause of political pluralism; they turn patriots into innocent prisoners, stifling the organic expansion of democracy while damaging the future political brain trust of the country.

While the economic landscape of China radically changes, China’s long era of brutality remains unchanged. Good people suffer. Illegitimate prisoners pack prisons. Citizens in custody die dreadful deaths. It is a government that is reliant on the brutal use of force to check the civil conduct of its citizenry, and is generally regarded as morally bankrupt, spiritually bereft, and lacking in political legitimacy, a government living on borrowed time. The only question is: How much time does it have left? It could be two years or twenty. However many years remain, if history has taught us anything, it’s that between now and then, the Government of the People’s Republic of China is perfectly willing and profoundly capable of destroying many more people’s lives in its desperate attempt at self-preservation.

Though a principal victim of Beijing’s offenses against humanity, the Falun Gong has exhibited a remarkable profile in courage by waging a pacific battle against a merciless empire that uses unbridled force to fight empty shadows. In doing so, it has been very careful to define itself as being one hundred percent non-political. That position is understandable in light of the fact that the practice of qigong—Falun Gong or otherwise—has been historically devoid of political affiliations, concentrating on a “mind-body cultivation practice” instead.

On the opposition end of the political spectrum is CDP. It is one hundred percent political. The guiding principles of CDP read in relevant part: “The CDP advocates fair competition in both the economic and political arena, opposes political monopoly and economic monopoly in any forms; the CDP is also committed to promote transparency in political life and administrative efficiency; the CDP calls for social and political institutional transformation in a peaceful and orderly manner, we oppose chaos, we oppose the removal of violence by using violence. We believe that we should achieve our goals through peaceful, rational and non-violent means. We support that political confrontation should be replaced by civilized dialogues...”

Such a keen emphasis on replacing confrontation with sophisticated dialogue is welcome and above all, necessary, if qualitative institutional change tilted toward democracy and a genuine respect for human rights is to arrive nonviolently in China at the earliest possible date. Chaos serves only the scavengers of history, not its most noble architects. However, a fundamental question about the development of CDP as a vehicle for positive political change remains. How is CDP to evolve into a mature instrument of power capable of asserting its political legitimacy worldwide and replacing the Communist Party when democracy finally takes hold?

On this question, the separate paths of Falun Gong and CDP could merge. If for no other reason than to compound the visibility of their oppression at the hands of the Chinese government and to extend the reach of their campaigns to nonviolently progress historical change inside China. How? By exercising—even in exile—their fundamental right to vote as Chinese citizens.

An internationally recognized human right, the right to vote is enshrined in core UN human rights treaties, including the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. The act of voting is arguably one of the highest acts of citizenship—if not the highest. Its authority stems from the fact that voting for duly elected representatives is the most direct expression of the will of the people and represents the consent of the governed. It is a profoundly moral act because it allows citizens to take responsibility for and control over the policies and performance of their governments. There can be no steadfast protection of basic human rights in any society without the effective exercise of the right to vote. Arguably, it is first among equals in the universal pantheon of civil rights.

Which is why the CDP needs to engage in the democratic process—even in exile. In order to mature its leadership on behalf of the overseas Chinese community in preparation for the day when it can and will compete for political power in China, and demonstrate that it is fully capable of conducting itself as a credible organization, it needs to practice what it preaches—democracy—and on a grand scale.

That is to say, CDP will best serve the cause of human rights in China—and one of its main constituencies, the Falun Gong—by calling elections, fielding candidates, overseeing the voting in of elected officers, and starting to function on a daily basis as a legitimate political party. This will be the first step toward eventually accomplishing two other critical goals: 1) the establishment of a truly global Chinese World Congress, composed presumably of both CDP and non-CDP members; and 2) the creation of the official Chinese “shadow” government-in-exile, along the lines of a high profile, fully operating “China Interim Government,” responsible for the authoritative articulation of official overseas Chinese democrats consensus views in opposition to the CCP. Other prime examples of democratically-run political organizations-in-exile, formed to serve the interests of their constituencies, are the Government of Tibet in Exile, under the leadership of His Holiness the Dalai Lama, and the World Uyghur Congress, led by Rebiya Kadeer.

The overseas CDP is fully capable of coordinated and qualified leadership. Such exiled leaders as Xu Wenli, Wang Youcai, Ni Yuxian, Wang Jun, Xie Wanjun, Tang Yuanjun, Wang Xizhe, and Wei Jingsheng, among many others, could choose to run for election to senior CDP leadership posts, drawing global attention to important Chinese issues, both in the mainstream Western press as well as the Chinese press. Candidates for office could take part in a myriad of vigorous public debates, before any number of interested constituencies, including the Falun Gong, in order to stump for votes. Their views and opinions would then be communicated to the entire world through newspapers, including the World Journal and the Epoch Times, for appraisal by potential voters. Indeed, those news sources could sponsor candidate debates and forums, as is done in the West in national elections. Television networks, like NTD, could broadcast those debates internationally, informing voters about the candidates on a grand scale. On Election Day, polling places would open in America, Canada, Europe and Australia, permitting the first-ever slate of CDP leaders to be elected by ballot box.

Such elections would immeasurably enhance the institutional and political legitimacy of the current Chinese human rights/pro-democracy movement, and significantly raise its political profile worldwide, especially if voters turned out at the polls in large numbers on three continents. Political leadership elected by such large numbers would start CDP down the path toward becoming a highly persuasive opposition voice for the Chinese people. Moreover, it would demonstrate that the Chinese rights movement had finally arrived and was capable of practicing the essential art of democracy, moving it down field toward establishing a Chinese World Congress and eventually a functioning “shadow” government, one day mounting a serious political challenge to Beijing.

How are Falun Gong’s nonpolitical interests served by CDP’s political empowerment?

Assuming that Falun Gong practitioners accept that a democratic China will best protect their right to practice qigong, it is clearly in their vested interests to perform one of the first duties of citizenship in a democracy: cast their vote for duly elected representatives, exercise their human right to enjoy representation in exile. It is the most meaningful way in which the Falun Gong, singularly and collectively, in Australia, Europe, America and Canada, can contribute to the advance of democracy in China that does not—and will not—violate its peaceful and nonpolitical nature.

The Chinese pro-democracy movement has been steadfastly supportive of the Falun Gong. It has stood by them for over ten years. It is time for Falun Gong to reciprocate by helping them, by supporting their right to do what democrats do the world over—run for election.

In this way, with the simple exercise of the power of one person-one vote, a ten-year-old coincidence of oppression, initiated by a paranoid Chinese government against the Falun Gong and CDP, can be turned into an historic providential coincidence of another kind—one that advances rather than retards democracy and human rights in what may one day become the New Republic of China, or in CDP’s own visionary language of China’s future, the “Third Republic of China.”

Chinese dissidents should heed Tim Cooper's advice

- More ideas on unity for Chinese dissidents -

By John Kusumi, Director emeritus, the China Support Network

In a recent article, friend of freedom Timothy Cooper (Executive Director of World Rights, also experienced with the Free China Movement and the China Democracy Party), advocates that Falun Gong and the China Democracy Party (CDP) should move closer together, with CDP to hold an election and Falun Gong practitioners to vote for its leadership.

It is well known that Falun Gong urges everyone to move away from the Chinese Communist Party -- so it seems natural as they move away from the old arrangements, that they should move towards new arrangements for Chinese society.

The CDP is indeed working on new arrangements for Chinese society. They have a project of enormous proportions to change the sweep of history. In June 2007 in the U.S. state of Rhode Island, a First Party Congress of the CDP was held under the auspices of Xu Wenli. That Congress adopted a Declaration of "China's Third Republic," an expression of intent to build a third republic while respecting the work, effort, and legacy of two earlier attempts (1911 and 1946) to make a democratic Chinese republic.

For many years, Chinese dissidents have focused on the party system. One could argue that too many dissidents have made too many political parties, but from a review of all of the efforts, higher name recognition and hence greater strength is present for the China Democracy Party. The effort of CDP is "out in front," ahead of the pack of additional dissidents who work on more alternative parties.

Dissident Xu Wenli had ambitions to make a political party -- and that Declaration of the Third Republic of China -- but, was not ambitious to make a government-in-exile.

A saying says that "nature abhors a vacuum," and late in 2007, other dissidents announced plans for the China Interim Government (CIG), which went into operation at the start of 2008. The CIG has a very hardline flavor to its politics, while at the CDP, Xu Wenli is known to be more moderate. Xu might be willing to talk to Maoists; while CIG would be more inclined to jail Maoists, bringing them to justice for their crimes against the Chinese nation.

The free Chinese movement includes towering intellects such as Yang Jianli, who has been able to formulate a proposed Constitution for a future democratic China.

All of the mentioned efforts are strong steps in the right direction -- I believe that China needs these things, and that the mentioned efforts should be welcomed. And for my part, I came up with a proposed flag for a future democratic China.

Timothy Cooper and this author are known friends of the cause for a better China. For both the CDP and the Falun Gong, we are observers and often guest speakers in their activities. I can't speak for the origins of Tim Cooper, but when June 4 happened (the Tiananmen Square massacre of 1989), I was a 22 year old American student -- an undergraduate of Arizona State University.

I thought that American students should help the Chinese students. I started the China Support Network. Hence, mine is authentically a "grass roots" group, which takes no money from government. We do not have CIA involvement, nor even that of the NED (National Endowment for Democracy).

As a result, for free Chinese we have advice that is sincere and not sold out. I believe that this one thought in particular underpins the article of Tim Cooper: Chinese dissidents are like a school of fish, and they would be more graceful if they all swam in the same direction. Added power would flow from the added grace.

Mentioned above are four things that nations need:
- a political party;
- a government;
- a Constitution;
- a flag

These are four separate efforts coming from four separate camps in the democracy movement. My article title is "Thoughts About Unity for Chinese Dissidents," and I am arriving at the bottom line. Let's imagine that all four efforts can be united with the common theme and branding, that these are for the Third Republic of China.

"Third Republic of China" is the project declared by CDP, yet the project is larger than CDP itself. Theirs is good leadership, because they have provided a theme into which all of the other efforts fit.

Suppose that China Interim Government changed its name to be the Interim Government of the Third Republic of China. With one move, the CIG could increase its relevance and legitimacy, and by moving closer to the moderate wing of the democracy movement, it would become more central and more attractive to "centrist" Chinese dissidents.

Suppose that Yang Jianli renamed his Constitution to be a proposed Constitution for the Third Republic of China. Simply by renaming it, he would express that his is part of the larger, integrated effort to establish the Third Republic.

Suppose that CDP took up a slogan of being "the majority party of the Third Republic of China," and suppose that Falun Gong practitioners chose to be citizens of the Third Republic of China. They can be a large part of the constituency that is represented, even while the Third Republic lives overseas in exile.

The Interim Government could be more democratic by holding elections like those proposed by Tim Cooper, and Falun Gong practitioners could vote.

And for my part, I will rename my flag proposal as a proposed flag for the Third Republic of China. (Note that the word "proposed" indicates that the Constitution and the flag are not even provisional; they are merely suggestions on the same plane with all proposals. It is for others to take up, adopt, approve, or ratify the proposals, or to reject them, or to accept alternatives.)

We have already reached the bottom line of my article. And now, here is the proposed flag for the Third Republic of China:

Upcoming protests for Hu this week, Oct. 1 next week

2009-09-21T17:50:00.004+08:00

Upcoming protests as China's President Hu visits New York this week; then next week, the PRC anniversary

Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday protests planned by SFT

This week, Students for a Free Tibet (SFT) is all about protesting the arrival of China's President Hu Jintao in New York City. Their schedule of protests is as follows:

Monday, September 21st
PROTEST: Hu Jintao's arrival in NYC
When: 5-8pm
Where: Waldorf Astoria Hotel where Hu Jintao will be staying (50th St & Park Ave)

Tuesday, September 22nd
FREE TIBET RALLY & POLITICAL THEATRE
When: 9am-4pm
Where: Dag Hammerskjold Plaza, United Nations (47th Street and 1st Ave)
Why: Hu Jintao to attend UN Climate Summit with President Obama and other world leaders
Note: At 5pm the protest will continue at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel (50th St & Park Ave)

Wednesday, September 23rd
OPENING OF UN GENERAL ASSEMBLY
When: 10am-2pm
Where: Protest at United Nations - Dag Hammerskold Plaza (47th Street and 1st Ave)
Why: Hu Jintao will be addressing the UN General Assembly
At 2pm we have been invited to join the Iranians/Burmese and other groups for a Human Rights Protest (same location)

On September 23rd from 8-10am there will also be a protest at the Waldorf
Astoria Hotel.

At it's website, SFT also credits the Regional Tibetan Youth Congress, Regional Tibetan Women's Association, US Tibet Committee, and Tibetan Community of NY/NJ.

One week later, the China Support Network will co-sponsor protests in New York and at the Chinese embassy in Washington. Those protests on September 30 are timed to coincide with the October 1 anniversary of the People's Republic of China.

Wednesday, September 30th
CHINA EMBASSY PROTEST IN WASHINGTON DC
When: 2-4pm
Where: Embassy of the People’s Republic of China, 3505 International Place, NW
Co-sponsors: R.E.A.L. (Responsible for Equality And Liberty) and the China Support Network
Note to other human rights groups: More co-sponsors are welcome. A permit exists
from noon-6pm, which allows creativity in expanding the program.

Details about the September 30 New York event will follow in a later post.

News conference scolds China and Hong Kong

2009-09-20T10:18:00.002+08:00

Has the principle of “one country, two systems”
been forgotten, or abandoned?

September 20, 2009 (CSN) – A coalition co-founded by the China Support Network held a New York City news conference on Friday (September 18, 2009) to highlight the case of political prisoner Zhou Yongjun, who is a prominent figure from China’s Tiananmen Square pro-democracy uprising of 20 years ago. Zhou was the first elected president of the Autonomous Students Federation of Beijing Universities, the force which occupied Tiananmen Square during the run up to the infamous massacre of June 4, 1989. In that occasion of mass murder on global television, the Chinese Communist Party used its army and live ammunition to clear Tiananmen Square, killing about 3,000 unarmed protestors on the way in.

Zhou was captured and jailed from 1989-1991. International pressure led to his release, after which he emigrated to the United States. In the U.S., he obtained legal permanent residency, and became the father of two children who are U.S. citizens. In 1998 he attempted a return to China, and was captured and sentenced to three years in a labor camp. He was released somewhat early in 2001 because the Chinese government was bidding for Beijing to win host city status for the 2008 Olympics. His early release was a token gesture to display human rights improvement for the benefit of the International Olympic Committee.

In 2002 he returned to the United States and settled in California. Almost one year ago, in September 2008, he again attempted to return to China, out of concern for the declining health of his aging parents and the effects in his hometown of the Sichuan earthquake, which ravaged that area early in 2008.

Using a false Malaysian passport that Zhou purchased from an immigration company, Zhou went to Macao and tried to enter Hong Kong. At that point, Hong Kong police questioned him about an allegedly fraudulent letter that was written to Hang Seng bank by a person named Wang Xingxiang, which happens to be the name on the false passport that Zhou presented.

Zhou has made it clear that he did not author the letter in question. The bank had declined to transfer money in reply to the letter, because it had discerned that the signature did not match its records. After questioning, Hong Kong police concluded that Zhou was not the man in whom they were interested.

Zhou was then notified that immigration still needed to verify his identity, and that he was not allowed to enter Hong Kong, nor return to Macao nor the US. HK immigration authorities held him at the border for 48 hours, from September 28-30, 2008. In the words of Zhou, “Later they said ‘sorry’ to me that they misidentified me and turned me back over to immigration.”

Hong Kong immigration authorities experienced some mercurial lark and turned Zhou over to authorities of Mainland China. This was arbitrary arrest, not supported by any provocation, nor legal basis, nor any shred of due process of law. With no proceedings, no official decision, no chance for review, hearing, representation, or appeal, Zhou found himself moved to “a small hotel in Shenzhen.” What Zhou experienced may accurately be called an extrajudicial kidnapping.

The story inside China proceeds as we have seen in the world news. On May 13, 2009, Western news wires reported the formal arrest of Zhou, based on an arrest warrant dated May 8, 2009 citing suspected fraud. His detention was kept secret by the Chinese government for more than seven months prior to mid-May, 2009. The China Support Network scooped the news wires by writing about this case a month earlier, in mid-April, 2009. On Sept. 4, 2009, Radio Free Asia reported that Zhou will soon go on trial for the trumped up charge of attempted financial fraud stemming from the Wang Xingxiang letter.

At this point, it is observable that absurd and ridiculous (arbitrary) actions have and continue to occur in Mainland China. However, we must not lose sight of the point that absurd and ridiculous (arbitrary) actions occurred on the part of Hong Kong immigration authorities in September, 2008. If the present story were a movie, it would be a double feature, with two examples of script writing that should be denounced for barely plausible story lines.

The coalition formed by CSN, called RAZY (Rescue Alliance for Zhou Yongjun), held a news conference in New York City on September 18, 2009. Two Chinese dissident attorneys spoke about the two sides of this “double feature” human rights abuse case.

Attorney Li Jinjin spoke about the fact that Mainland Chinese authorities have no jurisdiction over this case – even if we suppose (for the sake of argument) the allegations were true. (Any attempted fraud on a Hong Kong bank is in the jurisdiction of Hong Kong authorities to prosecute. Because Zhou had not yet set foot on Chinese soil, he cannot have committed any crime in Mainland China.)

Attorney Ye Ning spoke about the ominous and precedent-setting violations by Hong Kong authorities. Such treatment is a new experience for Chinese dissidents. The case report notes, "Normally a non-HK resident refused entry to Hong Kong would be sent back to his place of origin, i.e. the place from which he travelled to Hong Kong."

In recent memory this has happened to other Chinese dissidents -- Wuer Kaixi and Yang Jianli have attempted to enter Hong Kong, and they have been put onto planes that returned them to Taiwan.

Also at the press conference, John Kusumi for the China Support Network and Yuewei Zhang for the families of Zhou Yongjun denounced and decried the whole double feature atrocity.

Back up materials released at the newser included a case report and copies of China’s arrest warrant for Zhou, its indictment of Zhou, an interview with Zhou, an opinion from the attorneys at Beijing's Mo Shaoping law firm, and an open letter to Donald Tsang, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. Also within the materials was a family impact statement from Yuewei Zhang, the fiance of Zhou Yongjun and mother of his daughter Fiona.

The actual news in the news conference may be the formation of the Alliance and the fact that it is submitting all of the above materials to the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention. The Alliance happens to feel that it is a slam-dunk case and hence that we can anticipate a U.N. determination of arbitrary detention.

The other actual news from the news conference is the open letter to Donald Tsang, the Chief Executive of Hong Kong. Hong Kong is supposed to exist with administrative and judicial independence from China’s central government, under the principle of ‘one country, two systems.’ Hong Kong has no legal basis to perform a secret rendition of a Chinese dissident to Mainland China.

Of course, the geopolitical climate in today’s world may have been tipped to favor secret renditions, due to the bad example and precedent set by the administration of a leading global superpower, which will remain nameless. (Perhaps the nation with the bad example should be called the Republic of Balagua. Thereby, the name is changed to protect the guilty superpower.) Bad example notwithstanding, the practice remains gangsterism without a legal leg to stand on – and, it is a challenge to the fundamental freedoms of the people of Hong Kong.

An ominous bad precedent has been set in Hong Kong’s handling of this case, and the open letter to Donald Tsang notes that it assists human rights abuse in China; forfeits Hong Kong’s administrative and judicial independence through “indecent and disgraceful” police cooperation with Mainland China; is a violation of all well recognized international protocols; and is a disgraceful betrayal. The signers call upon Hong Kong for self-restraint and remedy; calls for the international community to launch an investigation of this “serious development”; and calls upon Hong Kong people to stand up and speak out for the administrative and judicial independence of Hong Kong.

All presenters at this news conference became signatories to the open letter for Hong Kong’s chief executive Donald Tsang.

Related posts:
Prepared remarks for 9/18 news conference
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/prepared-remarks-for-918-news.html

Zhou Yongjun's Case Report, by attorney Li Jinjin
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/zhou-yongjuns-case-report-by-attorney.html

Zhou Yongjun's Arrest Warrant (English translation)
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/zhou-yongjuns-arrest-warrant-english.html

Zhou Yongjun's Indictment (English translation)
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/zhou-yongjuns-indictment-english.html

Zhou Yongjun's Jailhouse Interview (English translation)
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/zhou-yongjuns-jailhouse-interview.html

Zhou Yongjun's Defense Attorney's Memo (English translation)
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/zhou-yongjuns-defense-attorneys-memo.html

Zhou Yongjun's Family Impact Statement
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/zhou-yongjuns-family-impact-statement.html

Hong Kong Chief Executive Scolded in Open Letter
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/09/hong-kong-chief-executive-scolded-in.html

# # #

This Week at the China Support Network...

2009-09-13T13:05:00.003+08:00

This Week at the China Support Network

CSN to host RAZY press conference;
Obama praised for tariff on Chinese tires;
Friedman blasted for ignorance about China;
Chinese dissidents host art exhibit

September 13, 2009 (CSN)

CSN to host RAZY press conference

In responding to the Tiananmen Square crackdown, the China Support Network and the Chinese dissident community are rightly outraged by the capture, mistreatment, arrest, and upcoming trial for Zhou Yongjun, who in 1989 was the first Tiananmen Square student leader elected to chair the Autonomous Students Federation of Beijing Universities. The Federation was the occupying force in Tiananmen Square.

The Chinese government plans to hold a trial for Zhou, who lives in the United States where he has two U.S. citizen children, and who attempted a return to China in September, 2008. As he attempted to cross from Macao into Hong Kong with someone else's passport, Hong Kong immigration authorities decided that he should go to Mainland China in the custody of authorities. They transferred him to Mainland authorities who held him in Shenzhen before moving him to his home province of Sichuan and arresting him with trumped up charges.

There is absolutely no merit to the trumped up case against Zhou, and CSN has already described this case as Tiananmen Square persecution carried forward into the present day. On Friday, September 18, 2009, CSN will host a Manhattan press conference with Chinese legal experts to detail the case and to announce next steps which are being undertaken by RAZY. RAZY is an acronym for the ad-hoc Rescue Alliance for Zhou Yongjun.

The press conference will run from 12:00 to 2:00pm on Friday the 18th, at the National Arts Club, 15 Gramercy Park South, New York, NY 10003. Presenters will include attorney Li Jinjin, who is also well known from the Tiananmen Square student leadership; attorney Ning Ye; John Kusumi for the China Support Network; and Yuewei Zhang for the family members of Zhou Yongjun.

Obama praised for tariff on Chinese tires

The China Support Network extends its applause for the recent decision by U.S. President Barack Obama to raise import tariffs on Made-In-China vehicle tires. CSN's director emeritus, John Kusumi, said, "This is a first baby step towards closing the barn door and retrieving the U.S. economy from Communist China. However, it is very welcome news in that this step is in the right direction. Kudos must go to Barack Obama and to U.S. Trade Representative Ron Kirk.

"We used to think that a currency manipulation tariff would be the first Obama tariff against economic dirty pool by the Chinese regime. It turns out that a tire tariff appeared first. We are happy to take progress where we can get it -- so today, the China Support Network offers a round of applause to President Obama."

The China Support Network also calls upon Beijing to abolish Laogai and Laojiao systems in China. Because those systems promote slave labor, they too are economic dirty pool and serve to unbalance trade, tilting the playing field. As internationally-recognized human rights abuses, Laogai and Laojiao could easily become the basis of future tariffs from an enlightened U.S. presidential administration.

Kusumi commented, "When they want the jobs back in America, Laogai and Laojiao are ready reasons for tariffs. They are low hanging fruit -- easy to criticize and easy to tariff, in the same spirit of social and economic justice as that of the Emancipation Proclamation." In line with that, rhetorical questions came from Kusumi: "Should labor be worth nothing? Or, should labor be worth something? And, how noxiously objectionable is this Chinese practice of employing slave labor?"

Friedman blasted for ignorance about China

The New York Times published an abomination on September 8, 2009 -- a rambling, incoherent, disjointed editorial from columnist Tom Friedman, which has been roundly criticized and lampooned on the internet.

Tom Friedman wrote, “One-party autocracy certainly has its drawbacks. But when it is led by a reasonably enlightened group of people, as China is today, it can also have great advantages.”

The entire Chinese pro-democracy movement will take a dim view of such dim witted statements. At CSN, John Kusumi said, "Friday's upcoming press conference, where my group will detail human rights abuse in China, serves to put the lie to Tom Friedman's romanticized notions of one-party autocracy.

"The New York Times has become an open sewer emitting the propaganda of Tom Friedman. His statements should be noxiously objectionable to all peoples of the free world. Someone else described Friedman as ‘your classic power slut.’ In the current case, he is brown nosing Chinese Communists, and the shoe seems to fit.

“At Friday’s CSN event, I will speak and may have more choice words either for Friedman specifically, or for the New York Times in general. If the Times fires Friedman before Friday, then I will applaud the Times for doing the right thing; but certainly not in the alternative case."

Chinese dissidents host art exhibit

The upcoming press conference of Friday will be hosted within an art exhibit that is already in town from the Tear Down This Wall Foundation. “Tear Down This Wall” reminds of the fall of Soviet Communism in Germany, but at this commemoration of the 20th anniversary of the event, the Foundation is actually run by a series of Chinese dissidents.

The Foundation has been co-sponsored by numerous well known Chinese dissidents, including Fang Lizhi, Liu Gang, Wang Dan, Wang Juntao, Wei Jingsheng, Xiong Yan, and Xu Wenli.

Their point is to say that The Wall is still there for those under Communism in China. We still need to tear down this wall. About the art exhibit, see also an earlier announcement from the Foundation, at: http://www.duping.net/XHC/show.php?bbs=11&post=998854

Zhou Yongjun's case reviewed by John Kusumi

2009-09-02T09:30:00.001+08:00

Tiananmen Square Persecution
Continues, Over 20 Years Later

A public statement by John Kusumi, China Support Network director emeritus

We have at hand an issue -- inattention to which demonstrates how the international community has sunk to lows of being inattentive to China's human rights crisis and the plight of China's pro-democracy movement, which garnered so much sympathy in the wake of 1989's Tiananmen Square massacre. Indeed, for the first decade after Tiananmen, Western news organizations constantly featured Chinese dissidents, abuses committed by the regime there, and high profile cases of prisoners of conscience. Then, for the second decade after Tiananmen, Western news largely did a 180-degree turn, and while prisoners of conscience continued to suffer, newscasters themselves seemed to have no conscience.

The Tiananmen crackdown is not over. The case of Zhou Yongjun is particularly galling because it can represent the entire Tiananmen Square student movement. Why? Because as the first student leader actually elected to lead the Autonomous Students' Federation of Beijing Universities, Mr. Zhou already once did represent the entire Tiananmen Square student movement.

What happened, and continues to happen, to Zhou is emblematic of China's handling of political dissidents from 1989 all the way up to the present day. Zhou is now in his third stint as a political prisoner in Mainland China. Twice before, he was arrested and imprisoned.

He was first arrested by Chinese authorities soon after the massacre of June 4, 1989. The international community raised pressure for his release, which happened in 1991 after about 1.5 years' imprisonment. In 1992 he made his way to Hong Kong and in 1993 he resettled in the United States. He became a legal permanent resident and also applied for citizenship. He now has two children who are U.S. citizens.

In 1998, he attempted a return visit to China, was arrested in Guangzhou, and became a political prisoner for the second time. He was sentenced to three years in a laogai ("reform through labor") camp. He was released about six months early in 2001, because the Chinese government was bidding for the Olympics to be awarded to Beijing. By making a token release of political prisoners, Beijing was able to display a fakey, staged impression of "human rights improvement." Zhou then returned to the United States in 2002.

Now, he is in his third stint as a prisoner of the Chinese government. Homesickness and his ailing father led Zhou to attempt another return to China in September, 2008. He was detained by Hong Kong immigration authorities as he attempted to enter Hong Kong from Macao. At that point, he could have been turned away just like other dissidents. (Yang Jianli and Wuer Kaixi have also tried to re-enter China recently, and they were put onto airplanes that returned them to Taiwan.) Instead -- and unlike their handling of other dissident cases -- the Hong Kong immigration authorities turned him over to Mainland police.

To enter China, Zhou had obtained a Malaysian passport which bore the name Wang Xingxiang. Authorities in China have charged him with "financial fraud," solely on the basis of a letter that is alleged to be from Wang Xingxiang to Hang Seng Bank in Hong Kong requesting to withdraw money. Zhou has made it clear that he did not author that letter, but it is the basis for the Chinese regime to continue to hold him now.

In this case, several objections are immediately obvious.

1.) Even if some crime were committed against Hang Seng Bank in Hong Kong, that would be for Hong Kong authorities to prosecute. At the time he was detained, Zhou had not even set foot in Mainland China, so absolutely no crime could have been committed within their jurisdiction.

2.) The Hong Kong authorities are not prosecuting the case. No government outside of China is charging him with a crime. Just as no crime was committed inside of China, neither did Zhou commit any crime outside of China.

3.) Zhou Yongjun is not Wang Xingxiang. Even if the Wang letter was real and not manufactured by Chinese authorities, the matter pertains to someone else, not Zhou. China's authorities are using slimmer-than-slim evidence to press trumped-up charges against Zhou in the absence of legal jurisdiction over the allegation that they complain about.

4.) Zhou was held incommunicado, with no legal representation and no notification to his family, for the first seven months of his current incarceration. This violated a Chinese law that a prisoner's family must be notified within 24 hours that a prisoner is held.

5.) Zhou suffered mistreatment in prison and his family was subject to harrassment, threats, and intimidation.

6.) The family hired famous attorney Mo Shaoping who is known for defending Chinese dissidents. Then, the authorities threw Mo off the case, depriving Zhou of legal representation and due process of law.

7.) I also object to how the U.S. State Department and the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama handled this case. The case is so thin as to be transparent. Instead of demanding Zhou's immediate release, the State Department made a mild bleating noise. They may have muttered something about how they hope Chinese authorities will handle this case fairly in accord with due process of law and international human rights norms -- but, the spokesman might as well have said "Baaa" or "Moo." Hillary Clinton herself, and Barack Obama likewise, said even less than that. We have at hand a case that shows the ineffectiveness of the U.S. State Department in defending human rights, and that displays how the U.S. executive branch is little more than a shoe shine boy for the Chinese regime.

8.) I object to how U.S. newscasts have shown no interest in this case, which is in fact Tiananmen Square persecution carried forward into the present day.

Under the Criminal Procedure Law of China, Zhou should have been given a trial by August 27, 2009. There is no word of any such proceeding having occurred in recent days; hence, the regime in China is once again violating its own laws in the handling of this case.

This case displays flagrant and egregious abuse by the Chinese government of Zhou's human rights. It falls into a pattern of crimes against humanity by the Chinese government. Not only political prisoners, but religious prisoners and other prisoners of conscience are swept up by the Chinese government. And clearly, the pushing and shoving in the matter of 1989's student uprising and June 4 massacre continues.

The China Support Network demands the immediate release of Zhou Yongjun. We also insist that it is time for the Chinese government to say "uncle" to the pro-democracy movement, and to implement the reform suggestions that have appeared in Charter 08 (a tract published in 2008, attributed to Liu Xiaobo, another detainee whose release we also demand) and the writings of Xu Wenli (co-founder of the Chinese Democratic Party) and other top Chinese dissidents. Xu Wenli called for a "Future of China" conference to be held this fall in Beijing; the China Support Network echoes that call and encourages the Chinese leadership to enable and implement that conference. To enable the conference, dissidents abroad must be permitted to go home from exile. We also urge that step to be undertaken.

/s./ John P. Kusumi, September 1, 2009

Attack victim and Chinese dissident Tang Baiqiao steps up campaign against CCP violence

2009-08-02T14:00:00.008+08:00

Tang Baiqiao Raises Profile,

Campaigns Against CCP Violence

In United States

August 2, 2009 (CSN) — Leading Chinese dissident Tang Baiqiao doesn’t take misbehavior from the Chinese government sitting down. Recently, violence was directed against him with a suspicious attack in Flushing, New York.

The attack came after threats of violence that Tang received last year while Chinese pro-democracy campaigners were opposing the Beijing Olympics and CCP violence then directed against Falun Gong practitioners in Flushing, New York.

Tang was a leader in the student uprising of 1989 that led to the Tiananmen massacre. Tang escaped from China into exile in the 1990s, and now lives in the United States. As a Chinese dissident, his resume is lengthy and distinguished. Previously, he was known for his organizations including the China Peace and Democracy Federation–formerly called ‘China Peace’–and the All China People’s Autonomous Federation.

It is true to note that Tang’s group and the China Support Network have cooperated in the Global Coalition to Bring Jiang to Justice; the Tuidang campaign; the Freedom First Olympics Second Coalition; and the Human Rights Torch Relay. At the beginning of 2008, Tang became an officer and spokesman for the China Interim Government. As previously reported by CSN, Tang explains that–

“The goal of the Chinese Transitional Government is to overthrow the Chinese Communist dictatorship; to establish a democratic society. Because only the overthrow of the Chinese Communist tyranny can solve all the problems in China.”

It was July 6 when Tang was assaulted at the Hollywood Karaoke Bar on College Point Boulevard in Flushing, Queens of New York City. The attack was unprovoked, and caused injuries for which Tang was hospitalized, but the incident did not include robbery. Since nothing was stolen, that reinforces suspicions that the attack was politically motivated.

Last year on May 17, there began to be organized and orchestrated violence directed against Falun Gong practitioners in Flushing, New York. Investigation revealed that “diplomats” at the Chinese Consulate were involved, as the Consul General Peng Keyu was caught on a tape recording, bragging about his leadership to instigate the attacks. (See this link) Multiple Falun Gong practitioners were assaulted, and according to Wenyi Wang of the Tuidang campaign, 22 arrests were made. In June, Falun Gong practitioners living in Ireland reported recieving death threats and physical intimidation.

At roughly the same time, Tang Baiqiao was investigating the CCP violence in Flushing, and working for the China Interim Government, and campaigning against the then-upcoming Beijing Olympics. This is when threats of violence began to be directed against Tang.

The Epoch Times reported in early July (See this link) that Tang and another dissident, Wang Jun, were “the targets of online attacks and threats.” Then in early August (See this link), the Epoch Times reported–

“Tang Baiqiao reported that an agent of the Chinese Communist Party threatened him while he was hosting a press conference in Flushing, New York on July 31.

“According to Mr. Tang, the agent threatened to spend US$300,000 to hire someone to cut off one of his hands.”

The above points strongly suggest that the July 6, 2009 attack on Mr. Tang was an instance of the CCP following through to make good its threats. However, the evidence remains circumstantial, and the precise origin of the attack has yet to be formally established by investigators.

However, Tang has not taken the attack sitting down. He has done much campaigning in the aftermath of the attack.

The attack itself was reported by the Secret China web site (See this link), and by the Epoch Times (See this link), and by the China Support Network (See this link).

On July 16, Tang appeared at a rally on the West Lawn of the U.S. Capitol, along with along with Congressmen Chris Smith (NJ), Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (FL), Gus Bilirakis (FL), Wm. Lacy Clay (MO), Anh “Joseph” Cao (LA), Roscoe Bartlett (MD), Lincoln Diaz-Balart (FL), Dana Rohrabacher (CA), and Sheila Jackson Lee (TX). It was a previously-scheduled rally to denounce the ten years’ persecution of Falun Gong, but with his hand still wrapped in a cast from his injury, Tang made a dramatic appearance.

As reported by the Epoch Times, Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen made note of Tang’s injury:

“The Congresswoman also noted a meeting she had with a man who had been ‘beaten up by Chinese thugs’ in the U.S. [Tang Baiqiao]

“Ros-Lehtinen had a warning for the Chinese embassy and consulates in the U.S.:

“‘Any Chinese diplomat who engages in the coordination of an assault on an American citizen inside this country should be declared ‘persona non-grata’ by the State Department and sent out of the United States.’”

Next, Tang Baiqiao made a campaign out of this incident. He held one press conference in New York on July 21, and another press conference in Washington on July 30. The New York event was part of a series of “Flushing Forums.” As reported by the Epoch Times (See this link),

“The Flushing community began to hold the forums and other activities exposing the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) involvement in a sequence of violent assaults of Falun Gong practitioners by the CCP organized individuals that began on May 17, 2008 on the streets of Flushing.”

The Flushing Forum also heard a speech from Dr. Gao Dawei, reprinted here: at this link

Both the New York and Washington events had representatives from several other pro-democracy groups on hand to denounce the attack against Tang Baiqiao. In Washington, the press conference was held at the Rayburn House Office Building of the U.S. House of Representatives. Congressman Lincoln Diaz-Balart (R-FL) sent a representative. Also, the exiled leader of the World Uyghur Congress, Rebiya Kadeer, was represented by Alim Seytoff, Vice President of the Uyghur American Association.

As reported by Gary Feurerberg in the Epoch Times,

“The purpose of the press conference was to awaken the public and alert law enforcement in the U.S.—Justice Department, F.B.I., the Congress, Homeland Security—to illegal activities being allegedly conducted by the People’s Republic of China within the shores of the United States, and that the violence towards free expression common in China is being transplanted to America….

“Mr. Tang expressed some frustration in convincing others that the attack on him was planned and executed by Chinese communist agents in the U.S. The police, F.B.I. and Homeland Security still ‘do not believe 100 percent’ that the attack was from the CCP, he said.

“‘I am confident the CCP did this to me,’ Tang said. There was no reason for anyone else to beat him, he explained. ‘We have a lot of evidence on the truth of the CCP, but I don’t want to affect the investigation. I can’t say much more, or give too much detail.’….

“‘Mr. Tang’s activities and close association with the Falun Gong group aroused the attention of the Chinese Communist [regime] and he has been closely followed,’ said Jintao Cao, Chairman of Chinese Coalition for Citizens Rights, at the news conference. ‘He received death threats a number of times and he told me before that the Chinese [regime] has been trying to have one of his arms or legs for tens of thousands of dollars.’”

Tang Baiqiao wants the U.S. justice system, including figures such as Attorney General Eric Holder, and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, to lean into this case. Leaders of the pro-democracy cause are seeing the Flushing incidents as part and parcel of their struggle for democracy in China. They see linkages between the situation in Flushing and the situation in China, and many dissidents have responded with denunciation for the violence, and by making the incident a jumping off point to underscore what they have been saying about the coming demise of the CCP.

For its part, the China Support Network (CSN) deplores the violence in Flushing, and has no doubt that the attacks are initiated by those who salute the red flag of Communist China. We reiterate our prior denunciation of violence in Flushing, and refer observers to a prior update (See this link), which has a CSN speech that was delivered at a rally in Flushing, run by Falun Gong practitioners on June 14, 2008.

CSN also recommends a change in the China policy of the U.S. executive branch. North Korea and Cuba do not get any rewards for having Communist Party-run governments; the rewards for China’s communists, dictators, tyrants and thugs are obscenities, and place the United States in the morally reprehensible situation of being a financial backer and hence accessory to the crimes against humanity perpetrated by the Communist Party.

When U.S. China policy more closely resembles its North Korea policy; when we are calling out China as a rogue nation and a failed state; then, justice will be better served and the U.S. will be back to its original values, nature, and character. Until then, “We are off the rails,” in the words of John Kusumi, CSN’s founder and director emeritus.

Multiple news bulletins of July 21, 2009

2009-07-21T20:21:00.010+08:00

Hu Jintao comes under criticism; Tang Baiqiao holds press conference; Can hip-hop save Falun Gong?

Once again, we are having a lot to say all at once. Therefore, today's update will link to separate blog posts that go into detail.

Hu Jintao comes under criticism

The tenth anniversary of Falun Gong persecution was on Monday this week. A series of conferences, vigils, marches, and rallies occurred throughout last week. The China Support Network co-sponsored a 'Freedom For Falun Gong' rally and concert Sunday on the National Mall in Washington DC.

Something was qualitatively different in the speech making of Sunday. Before, we would decry the CCP (Chinese Communist Party) regime and its former leader Jiang Zemin, who began the persecution of Falun Gong. We would largely spare the current administration of Hu Jintao from the most direct criticism. That was before -- no more. Sunday's speech making suggested that Hu Jintao belongs in the International Criminal Court, on trial for genocide and crimes against humanity.

The blog post with the complete CSN speech of Sunday is at URL:
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/07/full-text-of-july-19-speech-by-csns.html

Tang Baiqiao holds press conference

Tang Baiqaio is a prominent figure in Chinese dissident and Falun Gong communities, with roles as an officer and spokesman for the China Interim Government.

In recent news, Tang was assaulted, punched in the face, and had his hand broken in Flushing, New York. (Flushing is a Chinatown section of Queens in New York City, with a high concentration of pro-democracy Chinese dissidents and organization headquarters in this cause.)

Communist thuggery is suspected as the cause of the assault in this case, which occurred at the Hollywood Karaoke Bar in Flushing. According to a report by Secret China web site, Tang went there at a friend's invitation. In the words of Secret China,

"As soon as he arrived there, he was urged to leave immediately by a guest. There were two men with northern Chinese accents who began to push him as soon as he sat down. Tang decided to leave when he found that polite protests were ignored, however, he was punched in the face and the other man threw beer bottles at him as he tried to leave, fracturing Tang's hand."

This brought condemnation from Wu Fan, the President of the China Interim Government. Wu Fan said,

"This is a replay of the Flushing incidents last year when CCP thugs attacked Falun Gong practitioners. The CCP tries to transform its internal contradictions to overseas countries. And it may be a sign that the CCP is beginning to disintegrate."

Tang has long been a supporter of Falun Gong and of the Tuidang (Quit the CCP) campaign. Recently, he has spoken out against the Chinese government's crackdown against Uyghur Muslims. He was quoted as saying,

"I had publicly expressed that I am against the CCP persecuting Chinese Uyghurs and Chinese Han people; I call for Chinese people not to be fooled by the communists, I raised a valid point: In today's Xinjiang, today's China, there is no difference between Uyghur and Han; only rulers and the ruled, the oppressor and the oppressed. All the killings and disasters in China have been created by the CCP.

"We, the oppressed, shall stand together in order to prevent the atrocities committed by the CCP; in order to put an end to suffering and killings."

Of course, the China Interim Government is fully hardline in its stance with the Chinese government. Tang explained,

"The goal of the Chinese Transitional Government is to overthrow the Chinese Communist dictatorship; to establish a democratic society. Because only the overthrow of the Chinese Communist tyranny can solve all the problems in China."

Perhaps these factors motivated Communist thuggery, the suspected cause of the July 6 assault on Tang Baiqiao in Flushing.

Today (Tuesday, July 21), Tang Baiqiao will hold a 1PM press conference at the office of the China Democracy Party World Union (CDPWU), near the public library in the middle of Flushing. CDPWU is an organization run by Wang Jun, another prominent Chinese dissident.

Can hip-hop Save Falun Gong?

The China Support Network was very impressed by meeting Joe L. Da Vessel, a performer of Gospel Rap / Hip-Hop, on the program at Sunday's rally for freedom of Falun Gong. There is a first-person account in a lengthy blog post by CSN's John Kusumi at the URL below. It says in part,

"Can a Falun Gong rally be turned into a hip hop revival? If I didn't see it with my own eyes, I would not have thought it plausible."

See http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/07/gospel-hip-hop-meets-falun-gong-rips-hu.html

Rally anouncement

2009-07-15T14:51:00.002+08:00

Crackdowns in China prompt rally on
National Mall in Washington DC

CSN invites the public for July 19 rally, 3-6pm
Marking the tenth anniversary of Falun Gong persecution in China

"I think that one year of genocide is too much. So why are we talking about ten?" This rhetorical question sets up the speech we anticipate to be delivered by John Kusumi, founder of the China Support Network (CSN), at a Washington DC rally upcoming on Sunday, July 19 2009. Rock band Light Club, known for its songs that present Chinese human rights issues in the form of American rock music, will also appear and debut a new sonic experience to boost Chinese human rights. Live streaming video of the event will be viewable in China (to those who can get around the Great Firewall of regime-sponsored internet blockage.)

These are weighty times in the China issue. On July 5, the CCP (Chinese Communist Party-led government) commenced a new crackdown with a massacre of Uyghur residents in the city of Urumqi in the west of China. News reports have likened that crackdown to the one which occurred in Tibet last year. China's President Hu Jintao quickly abandoned the G8 summit and left Italy to return to China.

"He had to hurry home to commit genocide and crimes against humanity," offered CSN's John Kusumi as his interpretation of the move. Kusumi has also published an article, "What recently happened with Uyghurs?" that offers more nuanced analysis and is currently making its way around the internet.

Kusumi offered some more perspective by saying, "The China Support Network began in order to denounce one crackdown, the Tiananmen Square crackdown [of 1989]. Now look at what is on our plate today: Tiananmen crackdown [1989], Falun Gong crackdown [1999-present], Tibetan crackdown [of 2008], and Uyghur crackdown [of 2009]. The CCP can't finish having one problem before it commences to add new ones into the record of history."

In terms of death toll, the Falun Gong crackdown is the biggest and deadliest, followed by the 1989 Tiananmen crackdown, the 2009 Uyghur crackdown, and the 2008 Tibetan crackdown in that order. Hence, it is fitting that the rally which is planned for Sunday on the National Mall (between 3rd and 4th Streets, in Washington DC) is in observance of the tenth anniversary of the still-ongoing Falun Gong crackdown. "The Communists are stubborn, and don't change their ways," observed Kusumi.

The rally is sponsored by Friends of Falun Gong, with the China Support Network and Light Club as co-sponsors. Thousands of Falun Gong practitioners are likely to be in attendance. Additional music and speeches will come from other quarters as well. The China Support Network and Light Club are mainstream in the Chinese pro-democracy movement, and their starting point was response to the 1989 Tiananmen massacre. They have strongly supported the Falun Gong, and so the program will now blend these angles into a more general angle that is pro-freedom and in line with the international human rights community.

Light Club is an American rock act started by CSN man Tim Britt. Britt is the band leader, songwriter, guitarist, and at the University of Hartford, Britt is a professor of audio technology. Previous rallies have heard performances of "Remember Tiananmen Square," "Freedom First, Olympics Second," and "Bye Bye CCP." Could there be something new this year? Yes. According to Kusumi, "It's safe to spill the beans. This will be the premier live performance of 'Chinese Democracy Defiled.' It nicely rounds out an excellent quartet of songs for this cause. The existence of the song is not a secret; it's already on MySpace. What will be new is to hear it live with a large audience."

For those who want to preview the new song, 'Chinese Democracy Defiled,' it is at www.myspace.com/lightclubmusic.

# # #

What recently happened with Uighurs?

2009-07-10T23:07:00.003+08:00

What recently happened with Uighurs?

There are four possible narratives about the Uighurs. (1.) This is not about separatism; (2.) This *is* about separatism; (3.) This started as harmonious, but it may lead to separatism; and (4.) This started out about separatism, but it will lead to harmony.

In a process of elimination, we can immediately rule out narrative # 4. Nobody is feeling very harmonious about what recently happened. This article will analyze narratives # 1, 2, and 3.

#1. This is not about separatism.

In this case, to understand the Urumqi incident of 7.5 [July 5, 2009], it is first necessary to understand the Shaoguan incident of 6.26 [June 26, 2009]. In the Shaoguan incident, Uighurs were getting hurt. Later, in the Urumqi incident, both Uighurs and Han were getting hurt. Shaoguan is the city in Guangdong province where the Xuri (or "Early Light") toy factory was the site of a violent clash between Han Chinese and Uighur workers. It is said that in May, the Chinese government brought 800 Uighur peasants to work at the toy factory in Shaoguan. This may have displaced some Han Chinese workers. If so, that is a grievance that should be taken up with the Chinese government, not the Uighurs.

A laid off, disgruntled worker is said to have started a rumor that the new arrivals (Uighurs) had raped Chinese women. The government itself has called that rumor false, and according to Xinhua (the Communist Party newswire), it has arrested two men for spreading rumors online about the alleged rapes. As far as I know, that is a change in the government's story since June 27, when the Associated Press (a Western newswire) quoted an unnamed "spokesman from the Shaoguan City government" saying, "the fight started after a Han Chinese girl entered a dormitory where Uighur workers were staying. Uighur workers tried to harass her, and she screamed."

The Wall Street Journal reports, "It appears many of the factory's 18,000 workers and Han Chinese across the country believe the rape allegations are true and the government is covering up the facts to protect minority people and preserve ethnic peace."

Well, the rumor alone was enough to start fighting in Shaoguan. What is described by Uighurs is a massive, racist mob attack. "Thousands of Han Chinese workers attacked the ethnic Uyghur workers in an electric toy factory in Guangdong province, southern China. By carrying metal pipes, knives and bricks in their hands, the Han Chinese workers in mass numbers entered the Uyghur workers dormitory to attack the Uyghurs." The government reports 2 Uighurs killed and 118 injuries. The World Uyghur Congress reports 18 Uighurs killed and 300 injuries. Less reliable YouTube comments suggest 26 - 300 killed.

Also troubling is this from the World Uyghur Congress: "Some Chinese distributed a truck load of batons to Chinese workers. Security guards on site not only did not stop them but also helped distribute batons. The police did not show up for three hours." Citing "reports that local security forces did not take an active role in stopping the violence," the WUC notes that "the Chinese government failed to protect the Uyghurs from violent perpetrators."

It is clear that the Chinese workers were able to raid the dormitories of Uighur workers, and that one grievance here is that the Chinese government did not respond in a timely manner to stop the fight. Also by the government's own reports, 81 of 118 (69%) of the injuries were to Uighurs. Reports about that fight indicate no deaths of Han Chinese.

Are Uighurs unhappy about their treatment by the Chinese government? Yes. However, there is a good argument to be made that this was not about separatism. These 800 Uighurs were only factory workers, people who were there for a job, not for political independence or a free East Turkestan.

And, if we accept that 6.26 led to 7.5, then we can see the Chinese government spreading lies in its propaganda after the 7.5 incident. The Chinese government says that 7.5 was "orchestrated" by the international influence of Rebiya Kadeer, the lady who is President of the World Uyghur Congress. However, that should logically imply that Ms. Kadeer arranged the fight at the toy factory on 6.26. Clearly, that is a preposterous way to explain 6.26!

In this narrative # 1, the government has much to answer for, and it has clearly lied to the public about recent unrest of Uighurs, and this is not about separatism.

#2. This *is* about separatism.

Plenty of analysts will make this about separatism, recounting the lengthier history about minority grievances in the west of China. Reuters (a Western newswire) put out a "Factbox" about "China's restive Xinjiang region."

Note for newbies: Western news agencies have a double standard about western regions of China. In the case of Tibet, they use the name Tibet, not the Chinese name "Xizang province." In the case of East Turkestan, they use the Chinese name "Xinjiang province," not East Turkestan. Western newswires are inconsistent in this way. Does this reveal a bias of more sympathy for Tibetans, and less sympathy for Uighurs?

In any case, Reuters included these tidbits in its report:

"The oasis cities in what is now Xinjiang were conquered by China during the Han dynasty. For the next two millennia, they were variously independent, under Chinese rule, or part of other central Asian kingdoms. The area was briefly an independent East Turkestan in the 1940s and has been ruled by Beijing since the Communist victory in 1949.

"Human rights groups say China has used its support for the U.S.-led fight against al Qaeda to justify a wider crackdown on Uighurs, including arbitrary arrests, closed-door trials and application of the death penalty.

"The Chinese government has accused militant Uighurs of working with Islamist militant group al Qaeda to bring about an independent East Turkestan by violent means."

Chinese dissident Wei Jingsheng has commented that charges of terrorism against the World Uyghur Congress are "just a trick that the Chinese Communist Party used to graft rumors in an effort to defame."

Reuters again: Chinese security officials blamed attacks before and during last year's Olympic Games on independence-seeking Uighur militants. In the most violent, 16 armed police were killed in a bomb and stabbing attack in Kashgar.

Wei Jingsheng has also commented about that, but his comment reveals that in his definition, terrorism requires civilian casualties: "We should notice that, during the Beijing Olympics period last year, the violent attacks against the Chinese Communist regime by some Uyghurs targeted the Chinese police and armies, instead of the common people. That kind of action is different from 'terrorism.'"

Wei looks upon the instant villification of Rebiya Kadeer as evidence that the 7.5 incident was pre-planned by the Chinese Communist regime. It is true that the accusation came swiftly. In the early morning of July 6, less than 24 hours after the violence, MSNBC (a Western news outlet) was reporting, "Xinjiang’s government accused Uighur exiles led by a former businesswoman now living in America, Rebiya Kadeer, of fomenting the violence via the Internet."

By all reports, the original protest started peacefully, and according to the WUC protestors demanded "justice for Uyghurs wounded and killed in Guangdong. They also protested against increased racial discrimination they face as Uyghurs across China." Hence, this was a protest about civil rights and equal justice under the law – these are laudable and high minded objectives to promote.

The protest became a violent riot only after police brutality started the violence. That’s when buses and shops were burned. The government responded with one of its trademark crackdowns and a massacre of protesting civilians.

The Chinese state media says 156 died in the 7.5 [July 5] violence. Other credible reports have ranged from 500 - 800 dead, and one in Turkey even suggested over 1,000 died. Another report indicated that 17 demonstrators were crushed by armored vehicles near Xinjiang University.

Wei Jingsheng blames the government, saying, "Obviously, the Chinese government planned beforehand and according to their plan, produced this bloody massacre. The Chinese Communist regime must take responsibility for all the people who were killed, including both Han Chinese and Uyghurs. The Chinese Communist regime in XinJiang is the real ringleader for the massacre and arrests."

It is true that Uighurs have long standing grievances with the Chinese government, beginning with being conquered in 1949, and going on to being occupied, annexed, and colonized. The WUC said, "We ask the Chinese government to change their six-decade long heavy-handed policies of forced assimilation, as well as cultural and ethnic genocide imposed upon the peace-loving Uyghur people and seek to resolve the East Turkestan Question through peaceful dialogue."

These complaints echo those of Tibetans, who have had their freedom, their religious worship, and even their language curtailed. They have complained of cultural genocide, and they had an uprising and crackdown last year (in 2008). While they are not involved in the Urumqi incident, they are observing.

On July 8, Tibetan blogger Bhuchung Tsering wrote, "This development should be a wake up call to the Chinese Government on its overall policies relating to people like the Uyghurs and the Tibetans....those policies have failed and the Chinese Government needs to understand that." He also dismisses analysis through the prism of economics, and said:

"Highlighting economic reasons, which are logical and plausible, provides the authorities the opportunity to divert the attention from the root cause, i.e. misplaced policies on people like the Tibetans and the Uyghurs and denying them basic rights.

"To take another case, rather than trying to understand the root cause of discrimination and denial of rights of the Uyghur people, the authorities and Chinese opinion makers have sought recourse to blaming Rebiya Kadeer and the World Uyghur Congress for the unrest. To this, they have added the three forces of separatism, radicalism and extremism as being responsible for the unrests. This is very typical of the mindset that is responsible for the increased grievances among the people.

"Another attempt at diverting attention from the real issue is by calling this 'an isolated incident.'"

On the whole, whether or not the 7.5 incident is about separatism, clearly there are longstanding grievances and the victims of them can understandably want a separation between them and the malarkey that is brought to them by the central government regime in Beijing.

#3. This started as harmonious, but it may lead to separatism.

The real situation didn’t start as harmonious. Only Hu Jintao’s narrative started as harmonious.

The Chinese government seems to have "branched" its strategy. It's media did something different this time: actually cover the unrest. Writers for The Motley Fool investment newsletter witnessed this in Shanghai. They wrote in English to Western investors:

"There wasn't a person in Shanghai today who wasn't talking about western China. And though the business leaders we spoke with were happy to focus on the enormous economic opportunities in that part of the country, most people were focused on something else: the violent riots in Urumqi.

"We're not sure how much play this got in the States, but the news in China covered nothing but the turmoil that left more than 150 dead and 800 injured. This is big news here -- not only because uprisings against the government are so rare, but also because this uprising was based on the ethnic divide between the Uighur and the Han Chinese in a country that advertises its unity. The riot was sparked by the Uighurs' protest of how the Han Chinese government handled a fight in late June. That conflict in a Guangdong toy factory between members of the two groups left two Uighurs dead. In the eyes of the Uighur, the Han-dominated government eschewed justice to protect its own.

"China's normally staid, state-run media did nothing to play down the nature of the conflict. In fact, they stoked the fire by running bloody images of the riot in newspapers and on television-- and by running this quote from Urumqi Public Security Bureau deputy director Huang Yabo over and over again: 'It was like a war zone here, with many bodies of ethnic Han people lying on the road.' We heard that thousands of Han Chinese were mobilizing to go to Urumqi to protect their brethren."

The Western media largely downplayed this whole confrontation. At a time when "the news in China covered nothing but the turmoil...," the news in America covered nothing but the memorial service for pop singer Michael Jackson.

Tuesday, July 7, included two events: Muslim women (Uighurs) began confronting the Chinese authorities, saying, “Give us our men back!” And in the evening, a mob of civilian Han Chinese went charging into Uighur neighborhoods, getting “revenge” upon terrified Uighurs. On Wednesday morning, it became clear that there was an exodus of Uighurs moving out of the city
of Urumqi.

Above, I mentioned that the Chinese government seemed to “branch” its strategy. What is new or notable is its use of media. Usually, when there is unrest in China, its media has no story. This time, its media has two different stories, one broadcast in Uighur language for a Uighur audience, and the other broadcast in Mandarin for a Han Chinese audience.

For the Han audiences, they have highlighted “Uighur thuggery,” continuing the divisive insult campaign that demonizes or devalues many ethnic and religious minorities. Newsweek magazine notes, “Prejudice against Uighurs often portrays them as violent criminals.” Newsweek described segmenting the message—

"Since Urumqi's protest erupted, the government's Uighur-language TV channel has carried a statement from Xinjiang provincial government chairman Nur Bekri promising 'strenuous efforts' to investigate the killings in Guangdong. On Tuesday, Xinhua also reported 13 arrests over the false allegations. This attempt at redress segments the message. Awareness of local grievances is aired on regional TV in the Uighur language, while the wider message of Uighur thuggery plays to a receptive national audience."

On July 7, the WUC said that "the Chinese media showed yesterday only some wounded Chinese victims and scenes of Uyghurs attacking various vehicles--images that they carefully selected for the world and the Chinese audience to see, portraying Uyghurs as bad, troublemaking terrorists."

Indeed, Newsweek corroborates: “Official media depicts the rioters as thugs rather than people with political grievances.”

Why is the Chinese government trying to calm the Uighurs, but inflame and incite the Han Chinese? And at the same time, the government shut off the internet and cell phones. The obvious desire is to block unofficial information. Observers must conclude that the government has something to hide.

Unmistakably, there is the sense of coordinated “spin” in government media coverage. It is reinforced by what we quoted above, written by Motley Fool investment newsletter:

“In fact, they stoked the fire by running bloody images of the riot in newspapers and on television-- and by running this quote from Urumqi Public Security Bureau deputy director Huang Yabo over and over again: ‘It was like a war zone here, with many bodies of ethnic Han people lying on the road.’"

Newsweek also reports, “At the same time, state media ignores the role of the security forces in the body count.” So, the Chinese media swung into action with slanted, one-sided reporting that essentially says, “Uighurs: bad. Government: not bad.” The truth is the reverse, but many Han Chinese are falling for this slanted media reporting.

The Chinese government, which says it wants a harmonious society, deliberately fanned the fires of hatred. In the result, Motley Fool reported, "We heard that thousands of Han Chinese were mobilizing to go to Urumqi to protect their brethren."

So now, Han Chinese people are deliberately running into the middle of a riot, seeking vengeance for a “blood debt.” What should we do? Congratulate Beijing for its success in starting a race war? And what happens when Han Chinese people remember the blood debt of the Communist Party?

Chinese dissident Xiao Qiang told Newsweek that Chinese state media "is very unified. They all point to Rebiya Kadeer, they all have the same narrative, there's no independent reporting—it's a very highly controlled version of the story."

Perhaps Han Chinese people should take into consideration that their government, through the media, lies to them. Their story will always take the form, “Other people: bad. Communist Party: not bad.” I repeat that the truth is the reverse, and it would be good if sophisticated news consumers would finally see through the media’s web of lies.

If China continues on its present course, it can indeed lead to separatism. There are cycles in Chinese history, where a divided China will next come together, but then in a united China, the center cannot hold. After a period of strong central government, the next stage in this cycle is separation. If history is a guide, separatism may indeed be next.

Dictator Loses Face In Iran; CSN reax

2009-06-21T23:03:00.003+08:00

Dictator Loses Face In Iran;
CSN supports civilians

A public statement of
the China Support Network
- June 21, 2009 -

The 2009 crisis in Iran has been compared with Tiananmen Square, the occasion 20 years ago when China's dictatorship responded violently to civilian protests with a military crackdown that killed over 3,000 people.

Of course, these two events are not the same and there are comparisons and contrasts that may be drawn. But at a deep level, the two occasions are both stories of civilian masses of ordinary people encountering "state violence," armed and bloody suppression that violates basic precepts of freedom and fundamental human rights.

This statement is written from the China Support Network, where the ostensible scope of our organization is to support the Chinese civilians against the Chinese dictators. However, we are a part of the international human rights community, and we are not blind to the suffering of others. For example, in 2005 the dictatorship in Uzbekistan opened fire and slaughtered civilians in the Andijon massacre. That was on May 13, 2005.

On June 3, 2005, for the 16th anniversary of Tiananmen Square, the CSN speech was titled, "There is no future in being a dictator!"

Most of the speech denounced the Chinese dictatorship, but Uzbekistan was mentioned so that in 2005, CSN said: "The publics of China and Uzbekistan could rightly be angry at the authorities in those countries; the authorities have been mass murderers of innocent civilians." Now in 2009, the publics of China, Uzbekistan, and Iran could rightly be angry at the authorities in those countries.

The statement in 2005 said, "As the Tiananmen community, we should extend our sympathies and heartfelt condolences, where we can relate to the victims, and the population that is being violated in government atrocities. We know just what those civilians are going through. Enough is enough of regime aid for Uzbekistan! --By that, I mean that the Western establishment should cut off Uzbekistan."

Today in 2009, as the Tiananmen community, we should extend sympathy and condolence once again. Regrettably, Iran 2009 has joined a list that includes Uzbekistan 2005 and China 1989. The China Support Network can underscore that "no, it is not acceptable to slaughter unarmed civilians at a lawful protest. That applies no matter what country is in question, and what year is on the calendar."

In this case, Iran's "supreme" dictator, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, overplayed his hand. The role of a final arbiter ought to be to "settle the argument" when disputes arise. Khamenei was swept into the drama of Iran by taking sides in the present dispute too early -- he helped to start the argument. He can no longer be looked upon as neutral or impartial; he is clearly one side of the power struggle that is now dividing Iran. And now, there is no remaining final arbiter to settle the argument.

There is a loss of face entailed for Khamenei. At the Friday prayers of June 19, 2009, he drew a line in the sand and personally forbade demonstrations on Saturday. On Saturday, demonstrators defied that order and went to the streets in protest. Some number of people were killed by security personnel who attempted to enforce Khamenei's premeditated crackdown. Violence may still be underway as this statement is prepared on Sunday, June 21, 2009. Hence, the death toll may still be rising.

The China Support Network applauds the bravery of the Iranian civilians and notes that Iranian government has devolved to a Fascist Islamic Mafia. It may be said that civilians crossed a line by demonstrating on Saturday, but when bloodshed starts from a violent government crackdown, that too is crossing a line. The lines are crossed sufficiently that the China Support Network rejects and denounces both the violence and its perpetrator, the less-than-democratic Iranian government.

It is time to stand in solidarity with the civilian population of Iran, and with Iranian dissidents in an Iranian democracy movement. We must hope for the improvement of conditions there and for the emergence of self-government in an Iran that respects freedom, democracy, and human rights. In the future, we may include Iranian dissidents in our human rights rallies. (They are already venues that sometimes see Tibetans, Uighurs, Mongols, Vietnamese, Burmese, and Laotians on the program.) It is time to expand our human rights efforts for all oppressed peoples.

20th anniversary of Tiananmen commemorated

2009-06-05T15:09:00.002+08:00

This is a China Support Network update in a different format.

So many events have accompanied the 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown, they do not all fit into one update.

There are seven new blog posts to cover some events of June 2 - 4, 2009. This email is merely an index to the other posts which can be read at links below:

June 2, 2009
U.S. House of Representatives passes H. Res. 489,
for the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/06/june-2-2009.html

June 3, 2009 (a)
U.S. Secretary of State releases four paragraph statement
for the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/06/june-3-2009.html

June 3, 2009 (b)
John Kusumi, founder of the China Support Network,
calls for Chinese people to rise up and sweep
away "the model of government-by-gangster"
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/06/june-3-2009-b.html

June 4, 2009 (a)
U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made four more gestures
(in addition to her hand in the June 2, 2009 passage of a House Resolution)
for the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square:
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/06/june-4-2009-nancy-pelosi-statements.html

June 4, 2009 (b)
Tiananmen Square student leaders again call
for Chinese democracy
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/06/june-4-2009-b-tiananmen-leaders-presser.html

June 4, 2009 (c)
Enormous crowd quadruples the usual size of turnout
for a Tiananmen anniversary vigil in Hong Kong
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/06/june-4-2009-c-hong-kong-crowd.html

Good videos - June 2 - 3, 2009
The China Support Network recommends taking in these YouTube videos
http://chinasupport.blogspot.com/2009/06/good-videos-june-2-3-2009.html

There are more stories that the China Support Network is likely to blog about later, such as:
Wuer Kaixi arrested
Light Club rained out
Wei Jingsheng and Ni Yuxian call for revolution
CSN's Kusumi buttonholes Congressman Rohrabacher

And here is an interesting quote from Congressman Rohrabacher:

"Twenty years ago this day, the government of China affirmed to the world that it is a criminal enterprise that is perfectly willing to murder unarmed people to stay in power."

20th anniversary of May 19

2009-05-19T11:07:00.008+08:00

The Ghost of Zhao Ziyang,
a Chinese Gorbachev

And more China Support Network news as
we prepare to commemorate the 20th anniversary
of the Tiananmen Square massacre

May 19, 2009 (CSN) -- Is anything new in the Tiananmen Square matter? Yes, in fact. Here in 2009, it is the 20th anniversary of the events that transpired at Tiananmen Square, and we are two weeks away as we approach the anniversary of that massacre. (On June 4, 1989, the Chinese government used its "People's Liberation" army to clear Tiananmen Square of civilian demonstrators, who were in a peaceful protest. The army used tanks, troops, and live ammunition -- killing over 3,000 people.) The issues remain mass murder, and the demonstrators' demand for political reform, freedom, democracy, and human rights.

The Ghost of Zhao Ziyang, a Chinese Gorbachev

Posthumously, a deceased leader is projecting his presence into this year's observances. Twenty years ago today, former Communist Party chief Zhao Ziyang was last seen in public. He was refusing to call out the military to deal with the student-led pro-democracy movement. He was in fact a reformer, and he had just lost a power struggle within the top echelons of the Communist Party. The hardliners such as Deng Xiaoping and Li Peng pushed him out, and on May 19 they were preparing the announcement of martial law. Zhao Ziyang went to Tiananmen Square and spoke to students with a bullhorn. He was apologetic, saying "We have come too late," and he urged the students to end their hunger strike and to care for their own safety.

Zhao Ziyang spent the rest of his life -- sixteen years -- under house arrest. He died in 2005 and that caused the China Support Network to raise its estimate, from 3,000 dead to 3,001 dead in the Tiananmen Square crackdown.

Now in 2009, his memoirs are being published. This leads to a new view of the history of the Communist Party at that time. "Prisoner of the State" is the book now being published in English, based on voice narration that was furtively recorded by Zhao onto cassette tapes during his time of house arrest. The publication of these memoirs is being supervised by Bao Tong, who was an aide to Zhao and who spent time in jail after the crackdown. Bao Tong is a famous Chinese dissident himself.

Speaking to the Epoch Times, Bao asserted that Zhao "believed China should adopt a western style parliamentary democracy. I believe this is his most important conclusion."

The publication of Zhao's book has already led to much comment in Western mainstream media, including CNN and the neoconservative Washington Post. In its preface, Harvard Business Review editor in chief Adi Ignatius says, "It is the first time that a leader of Zhao's stature in China has spoken frankly about life at the top. He provides an intimate look at one of the world's most opaque regimes. We learn about the triumphs and failures, the boasts and insecurities, of the man who tried to bring liberal change to China, and who made every effort to stop the Tiananmen Massacre."

He concludes, "Although Zhao now speaks from the grave, his voice has the moral power to make China sit up and listen."

Another Prisoner of the State: Zhou Yongjun

Last week in China, the family of Tiananmen Square student leader Zhou Yongjun received official notification by the government that Zhou is arrested and charged with trumped-up charges. This notice, which the law requires immediately upon arrest, came after the regime held Zhou secretly for seven and a half months.

It was also in the news recently that another leading Chinese dissident, Yang Jianli, was turned back as he attempted to enter China at Hong Kong. Authorities held him for two hours and then put him on a plane back to Taipei, Taiwan. The difference between these two cases is striking. Both are Chinese dissidents, attempting to enter China. In the case of Yang, he wanted to meet with activists based in Hong Kong, to coordinate the movement's observances of Tiananmen Square's 20th anniversary, which is upcoming on June 4, 2009. In the case of Zhou, he wanted to visit his aging and ailing parents. Yang was politely turned back at the point of entry; Zhou was grabbed by authorities, thrown in the slammer, held secretly without charges, and perhaps tortured during seven and a half months. And now, the regime has charged Zhou and threatens to keep him as a political prisoner for the third time.

The difference between these two cases, and the weak response of the U.S. State Department, led to a "Special Comment" by John Kusumi, the founder of the China Support Network. In the Special Comment, he scolds both of the governments -- Beijing and Washington -- who are mishandling the case of Zhou Yongjun. He nominates all U.S. Presidents from the time of Tiananmen Square to the present to be featured on a "Mount Rushmore of Corruption," because the U.S. executive branch never replied to the atrocity of mass murder in Beijing. And, he calls for U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton to resign.

Beijing and Washington are "two emperors with no clothes between them," Kusumi asserted. One can read his Special Comment at OpEd News by visiting http://tinyurl.com/p79ugp

During the past week, reports about Zhou Yongjun written by Reuters, the New York Times, AFP, the AP, DPA, and the London Telegraph were picked up and republished in hundreds of news outlets around the world.

Commemorate the 20th Anniversary of June 4

Plans are shaping up for the China Support Network and the Chinese democracy movement to commemorate the 20th anniversary of the bloody massacre as occurred in Beijing to stop the Tiananmen Square movement. Every city with a Chinese embassy or consulate is likely to see vigils and protests on June 3 and June 4.

Hong Kong

Hong Kong has four upcoming events. The march on May 31 and the vigil on June 4 are likely to be the largest public gatherings among those slated.
• “Reflections on June 4: 20 Years On” Forum (May 24, 2009)
• Public Calls for the Rectification of the June 4 Verdict (May 29 and June 4, 2009)
• Demonstration to Commemorate the 20th Anniversary of June 4 (May 31, 2009)
• Candlelight Vigil for the 20th Anniversary of June 4 (June 4, 2009)

Washington DC

Washington DC has three related events.
• A Washington Monument vigil, on Saturday May 30 from 6-9pm (photo exhibit in the first hour, music in the second hour, speeches in the third hour).
• IFCSS, China Support Network, and others hold a vigil at the Victims of Communism Memorial, Wednesday June 3 from 7-10pm.
• Yang Jianli's Initiatives for China holds a rally at the U.S. Capitol in the morning of Thursday June 4.

The Wednesday, June 3 event will include a speech by CSN's John Kusumi, and an appearance by the rock band Light Club, performing rock music that was written for the Chinese democracy cause.

U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) has been invited to both the June 3 and June 4 events. She has previously appeared at events organized by both groups.

Related web sites:
Hong Kong www.alliance.org.hk/english
Washington Monument www.remember64.org
IFCSS www.ifcss.org
China Support Network www.chinasupport.net
Initiatives for China www.initiativesforchina.org

Note that, in recent times, the Initiatives for China website has been inaccessible and reported hacker attacks. The URL is included because it may be fixed by the time you read this.

Book Review: Standoff At Tiananmen

2009-05-05T19:30:00.002+08:00

Due to the impending 20th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square massacre in Beijing, China, it is very timely that author Eddie Cheng has published the new book, Standoff At Tiananmen.

With details never before seen in English, Standoff at Tiananmen is a riveting narrative, telling the story of the student-led pro-democracy movement which, in 1989, took over Tiananmen Square in the heart of Beijing, China -- until the Communist Party dictatorship struck back, using its army to clear the square.

While every history of the Chinese democracy movement is a partial history, this book has more detail about these matters than ever before in English. Tiananmen Square had world press attention, so that the largest features of the story became well known--

The Short Story

In the widely known version of events, former Chinese reform-minded leader Hu Yaobang died on April 15, 1989. The Chinese students chose to mourn him in a very public way, as a show of support for the pro-reform current of political thought. The earliest images beamed around the world may have been the flowers, wreaths, and portraits of Hu Yaobang, which were placed in the middle of Tiananmen Square to mourn his passing.

The widely known events include the April 22 funeral of Hu Yaobang; the April 26 editorial in the People's Daily condemning the students (and a huge march on April 27 that was a reply to the editorial); the May 13 - 19 hunger strike, with a visit by Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev on May 15; and the period of martial law from May 20 until the bitter end on June 3 - 4, when the massacre occurred. Also well remembered is the Goddess of Democracy, a 30 foot statue which appeared similar to the Statue of Liberty. The Goddess statue was unveiled on May 30 and stood until tanks knocked it down on June 4.

Another widely known event happened afterwards, on June 5: One lone man stepped into the middle of Chang'an Avenue, to stop a line of tanks. The identity and fate of "the tank man" remains unknown, but his picture became an icon of 20th century resistance to communism.

A Closer Look

--However, it is good to have deeper and lengthier historical accounts. Now, just in time for the 20th anniversary of these events, Eddie Cheng has published Standoff at Tiananmen, and it is a valuable contribution to the literature about Tiananmen Square. For average readers, the book is engaging and readable, and for those who care about details, it adds depth to previous accounts.

It is a blow-by-blow chronology of the action, but as I mentioned, every history of the Chinese democracy movement is a partial history. There are points left out by Eddie Cheng, and those points can be gleaned from other sources.

Cheng’s book becomes a narrative of the students’ side of the story, and of the politics and decision making on their side. To account for the other side – the power struggle and decision making inside the government – is left to be the scope of others’ books, such as The Tiananmen Papers.

That choice to limit the book’s scope is fine with me – as a Generation Xer, on the side of the pro-democracy and anti-communist people, I believe that freedom is the right side of history, and I am most interested to have “our side” get its story straight.

Cheng was a Beijing University physics student beginning in 1980 and ending in 1986, when he left China. During the 1989 action, he could only watch on CNN just like the rest of the world public. But, he had remained friends with Liu Gang who was also in the physics department at Beijing University. Liu Gang had organized the “Democracy Salon” at Beijing University, a group that incubated student leaders of 1989.

A Comparison of Narratives

Before I say more about Cheng’s book, let me make a comparison between CNN coverage and another book, Tell The World by Liu Binyan.

A Chinese dissident has grumbled to me that “leading Chinese dissidents” are always creations of the news media. It’s simply whomever is getting the most attention at any given time.

If you look at CNN coverage at the tenth anniversary of June 4, they ran a human-interest retrospective that asked “Where are they now?” about June 4 student leaders. The only problem is that to watch CNN coverage, a newbie would think that only four students led the movement: Wang Dan, Wuer Kaixi, Chai Ling, and Li Lu.

For those who know better, the CNN coverage is cartoon-like in its over simplification. There were dozens of notable student leaders in the overall scene, and hundreds of individual campuses that went to the square. Even if every such delegation had just one leader, it adds up to hundreds of leaders on the scene.

The late Chinese journalist Liu Binyan provides a much better view of the action in his book, Tell The World. Tell The World was a narrative account about Tiananmen Square’s movement that was published in English almost immediately after those events in 1989. Liu Binyan was a famous and investigative journalist of high integrity, who reported for the People’s Daily in the 1970s and ‘80s.

The book by Liu Binyan formed a baseline understanding of Tiananmen’s events and informed my own views for many years at the China Support Network. That group, CSN, is one that I formed immediately after June 4’s massacre for American students to support Chinese democracy. At the time, I was a 22-year-old undergraduate of Arizona State University.

As the first book in the same genre – narratives about Tiananmen Square – Tell The World provides a basis for comparison and a yardstick by which to judge Cheng’s new Standoff At Tiananmen. Of course, these two views of the action are from 1989 and 2009, respectively. We might expect the later book to include more research and to have the benefit of more hindsight.

And that is exactly what is found in Standoff At Tiananmen. In 2005, when Liu Binyan died, the China Support Network eulogized him with high praise. Liu was an exceptional figure, and heroic to the pro-democracy movement. But, Cheng has released the better book.

Cheng’s book does an excellent job of blending myriad source narratives and anecdotes into a cohesive and coherent overall narrative. It’s more nuanced than Liu’s account, and more credible than Seeds Of Fire, another book with narrative about Tiananmen Square.

To my knowledge, Cheng has produced the best “T-Square” book yet. However, I do not read Chinese – I can only compare those I have seen in English.

Internecine Politics of the Student Leaders

It seems to me that translations between English and Chinese are often inexact. For example, the name of the student association can be translated many ways. When I met Wuer Kaixi in August, 1989, he spoke about re-constituting in exile ASUBU, the Autonomous Students Union of Beijing Universities. In the book by Liu Binyan, it is called the Interim Student Association of Beijing Colleges and Universities (ISABCU). Student leader Lian Shengde calls it the Autonomous Federation of Universities Inside Beijing (AFUIB).

In Eddie Cheng’s book, it is called the Beijing Students Autonomous Federation (BSAF). Lest my readers worry, I can assure you that these are four alternate translations for one name. In each case we refer to the same group.

The group is “autonomous” because it sprang up independently of the government. With prompting from Liu Gang behind the scenes, it was announced by Wuer Kaixi on April 21. On April 23, it elected Zhou Yongjun as its first president. Riven by disagreement, the group replaced Zhou with Wuer on April 28. On April 30, it replaced Wuer with Feng Congde. On May 5, it expelled Zhou. On May 6, Feng passed the baton back to Wuer Kaixi. On May 14, Feng returned. On May 15, it expelled Wuer.

However, the organization had lost its relevance because it was not Hunger Strike Headquarters. On May 11, Wang Dan and Wuer Kaixi participated as the autonomous federation passed a resolution to not have a hunger strike. However, they and Chai Ling decided that they would lead a hunger strike, but as individuals outside of their affiliation with the autonomous federation.

The hunger strike ran from May 13 – 19. Hunger Strike Headquarters became the operation run by Chai Ling as its Commander in Chief, with Li Lu as its Vice Commander.

The autonomous federation also had another challenge to its relevance, because Xiang Xiaoji and Shen Tong ran its Dialogue Delegation, which sought to negotiate with the government, as a splinter group.

In fact, as we learn from Cheng, the autonomous federation was supposed to rotate its presidency among campuses, not individuals. In another view of this matter, that is in fact what happened. Its first three presidents, Zhou, Wuer, and Feng, hailed from the University of Politics and Law, Beijing Normal University, and Beijing University, respectively.

But no one could have anticipated rotation and turnover at the breakneck pace as was happening at Tiananmen Square. On May 29, Tiananmen Square got a new commander named Yang Tao, a student from Beijing University. He lasted less than a day, but at least he gave Chai Ling a day off.

May 29 was deep into a new phase after the hunger strike – namely, martial law. At that point, residents of Beijing had been holding off the army for ten days, and on that day, art students were assembling the new Goddess of Democracy statue, which was unveiled the next day in Tiananmen Square.

Massacre

As the world knows, martial law troops entered Beijing on June 3, and opened fire with live ammunition at anyone in the way and even at bystanders, killing some 3,000 civilians of Beijing on their way to retaking Tiananmen Square. A tank knocked down the Goddess of Democracy statue in the early morning hours of June 4. The government of China has still not acknowledged or admitted to its crime against humanity, and there has been no accountability, no restitution, and no peace for the victims.

Those who remain outspoken continue to be harassed, or worse, by the Chinese government. For all of China’s development in the twenty years since June 4, political reform, progress, and development has been nil. China continues to be a one party dictatorship of the Chinese Communist Party – which has committed more human rights abuses in recent years, such as crackdowns against the Falun Gong health / exercise / spiritual group, and against Tibetan monks who follow the Dalai Lama.

Standoff At Tiananmen is an excellent blow-by-blow account of the matters which it covers. However, it is not the “Everything” compendium. My only quibbles with the book are the things that it does not mention.

Epilogue

There are people who became important to the movement in subsequent years, and it would be helpful if a book expressed where they were during 1989’s action. Yang Jianli, for one example, is a figure with great stature today, but Cheng’s book does not connect him with the action, nor indeed mention Yang at all.

The same can be said for those from outside Beijing who can trace their fame to the June 4 uprising – Lian Shengde, Tang Baiqiao, Liu Junguo. Lian traveled from Tianjin to Beijing; Tang organized in Hunan province; Liu organized in Guangdong province. Lian headed the Autonomous Federation of Universities Outside Beijing; Liu presided over the Autonomous Student’s Union of Guangzhou Universities.

Cheng’s book also says very little about the incident with paint filled eggs, thrown at the giant portrait of Chairman Mao, on May 23. In years after the June 4 uprising, the story became legend about the “Three Gentlemen” – Lu Decheng, Yu Zhijian, and Yu Dongyue, all from Hunan province – who defaced Mao’s portrait.

The omission of those stories does not detract or take anything away from Cheng’s book; it is excellent and commendable work – as far as it goes. I did say that any history of the Chinese democracy movement is partial, and the extra stories could make a book more complete, but not totally complete. While I am not a historian, I can clearly see that this is a pitfall of that profession.

A Sequel?

Such is life. On June 5, 1989, one lone man stopped a line of tanks on an avenue in Beijing, and American students started moving to form the China Support Network. That’s where I came in, and that is where I continue to work today. A sequel book that tells what happened to the democracy movement afterwards in exile would very likely include a lot of information that the CSN can report from first hand experience.

Perhaps Cheng will write that book, or perhaps I will. Because the struggle for freedom, democracy, human rights, and the rule of law is not yet won, the story continues.

I highly recommend Mr. Cheng’s book, Standoff At Tiananmen. I also urge interested readers to stay tuned by watching the China Support Network, where we often release contemporary news and activities for democracy in China.