People of 1989: Hu Jiwei (胡绩伟)

Born in 1916, Hu Jiwei was an old-hand within the Chinese Communist Party. He has worked in the Party's propaganda organ People's Daily and served as its Editor-in-Chief and Head for a long time, until he was forced to resign in 1983 for being too liberal-minded. After that, he mainly served in the figure-head position of being a member in the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress.

After the martial law was imposed in 1989, the government appeared to be paralyzed and without real control. Hu Jiwei sought to bring the rubber-stamp SCNPC into the fold and exert its power that had existed only on paper. With the help of intellectual Cao Siyuan and others, they collected enough signatures from SCNPC members to demand an emergency meeting of the Committee to discuss the martial law and the state of the government. The meeting never materialized.

Through reporter Gao Yu, he also tried to contact student leaders at Tiananmen Square directly and met some of them in his home, trying to persuade them to withdraw and leave the matter for legal procedures. Gao Yu had once successfully persuaded Wang Dan and drafted a withdraw statement for him, but the efforts eventually went fruitless.

After the massacre, Hu Jiwei was stripped all his official positions and received a punishment of 2-year in-Party probation (which is short of  expelling). But he refused to budge. A few years ago, he had written an essay commemorating Hu Yaobang and the Democracy Wall movement. According to his close friends, he has always concerned about the re-evaluation of the 1989 movement in his old years.

Hu Jiwei passed away on September 16, 2012. He had just celebrated his 96th birthday.


People of 1989

Hong Kong Government Relents after Tiananmen-Style Protests

Students and residents in Hong Kong who have been staging a large-scale protest against their government's "moral and national education" plan won a big victory yesterday as the government stepped back on the plan.

The plan, backed by Beijing, is intended to "instill patriotic fervor for mainland China," according to a New York Times report but is widely perceived by Hong Kong students as an attempt of forced brain washing. Those students staged multi-day street protests that involved tens of thousands in demonstrations, including large sit-ins and hunger strikes.

Book About Tiananmen: The Martial Law Troops in June 4 Event

The book The Martial Law Troops in the June 4 Event (available only in Chinese) is the second book written and self-published by Wu Renhua, a participant of the 1989 student movement and eyewitness of the massacre, following his previous Inside Story of the Bloody Clearance at Tiananmen Square. This book was published in 2009 and is mostly available in Chinese book stores at Hong Kong and elsewhere, as well as the author's site online.

For the past 20 years or so, the author has spent enormous time and effort collecting and analyzing historical records of the movement, especially the details of the bloody massacre. This book is the fruition of his belief that "we must name the killers" as it collects some of the names of officers and soldiers in the Chinese People's Liberation Army who participated in the massacre.

For this purpose, this book adopted a style close to an encyclopedia. After an introductory chapter, every chapter focuses on one particular army or other military unit, laying out its history, its actions during the martial law and massacre, and a list of available names of that unit, all in the same structure. In the preface, the author claims that the book "provides a most complete list of military officers who had been promoted after the massacre and, for the first time, a list of names of the participant officers and soldiers." Compared to the "between 180,000 and 250,000" troops mobilized, estimated by the author, the list of more than 2,000 collected names is indeed minuscule. But it also reflects the extreme difficulty in such research.

Besides those two lists, a particularly interesting analysis is of the 15 dead soldiers who had been awarded with the "Guard of the Republic" by the government. The author points out that 6 of them actually died in an auto accident, another of disease, and yet one of friendly fire.

Troop actions in 1989 has of course received some attention in the historical literature. Timothy Brook's Quelling the People is but one example. But it is still rare to see such systematic and detailed description of all military units as in this book.

The book also has its shortcomings. It only contains very few references for its sources, most of which referring to a few propaganda books published by the government in the immediate aftermath. Much of their contents were used directly without critical analysis. Some material in the book, including the names, are not sourced.

Due to its reference book style structure, this book is not very readable to the average reader. It is also difficult to use as it failed to provide an index. Therefore, its readership may be restricted to scholars and those who have keen interests in all things military. Nonetheless, this book will stay as a unique reference to one facade of the 1989 movement.


Books about Tiananmen

Chai Ling Sued for Religious Bias

Chai Ling, whose recent media exposure centered around her newly acquired religious belief, is now being sued by one her former employees for religious discrimination. Boston Globe reports that:

The employee, Jing Zhang, is a Chinese activist who once spent five years in a Chinese prison for promoting freedom and democracy, according to the suit. In the United States, Zhang had already established her own nonprofit, Women’s Rights in China, in Flushing, N.Y., when she joined forces with Chai to develop programs to prevent forced abortions in China. Then, she alleges, Chai fired her for being insufficiently religious and for declining to engage in “weekly corporate worship.”

The case may hinge upon the nature of Chai Ling's non-profit organization "All Girls Allowed," as whether it could be categorized as a religious one which are exempt from such discrimination. The report also points out, however, that Zhang Jing is actually an employee of Jenzban, a business founded by Chai Ling and her husband.

Zhang Jing is a Cathoric herself and refused "to practice her faith in the same manner as her boss, who is an evangelical Christian."

Book about Tiananmen: A World Transformed

President George H. W. Bush was only in office for four years but during that period (1989-1993) he saw what could be termed as the most dramatic change of world politics in our modern history. His memoir A World Transformed, co-authored with his National Security Adviser Brent Scowcroft and published in 1998, candidly recorded the foreign policy operations of his administration.

With the fall of Berlin Wall, the collapse of the Soviet empire, the wars in Panama and Gulf, it is perhaps understandable that the book only has a very small number of pages devoted to the effects and aftermath of the Tiananmen Massacre and the China affair in general. They are pretty much limited to Chapter 4: "Untying a Knot."

The chapter or book did include any thoughts or reactions of the authors while the 1989 student movement was in progress. Rather, it started right after the massacre, which caught the President by surprise. The chapter did contain valuable first-hand information on the thought process, strategy, as well as tactics the authors invoked, including excerpts of Bush's diaries at the time. It also provided a glimpse to the behind-the-scene, and sometimes secret, personal diplomacy spearheaded by Scowcroft. Both of them had been to China and met Deng Xiaoping personally before 1989 -- Bush as the first envoy to the People's Republic and Scowcroft as a participant of diplomatic missions by Presidents Nixon and Ford.

The title of the chapter is a phrase borrowed from a Chinese proverb meaning that a knot could only be untied by the one who originally tied it. Here, the knot is referring to the estranged state of the US-China relationship with Deng Xiaoping and Bush alternatively blaming the other as the one who tied it up.

The title accurately reflects President Bush's view on the situation. He never saw it as an opportunity to advocate liberty and human rights in China or condemning tyranny, but just a troublesome mess he had to untangle with his diplomatic skill. From the very beginning, he was fixated at preserving the fragile US-China relationship and determined to go out of his way to achieve it. He did condemn the Chinese government and impose limited sanctions. But he did it largely because he had to, not because he wanted to, as he repeated explained to his "old-friend" Deng Xiaoping in his then-secret personal communications.

The book also contains fleeting descriptions of the fights the Bush White House put up against the Congress and American public opinions in various China-related issues such as the scope of sanctions, the Most Favored Nation status, and the protection of Chinese students in the US. (The last one was largely a political turf fight with both sides making the same policy actions.)

Most foreign policy memoiors written by top government officials tend to be dry and largely unreadable. Bush and Scowcroft's A World Transformed is a refreshing exception. The book is written in a style that interlaces either author's first-person account of the events with a supplemental third-person story-telling to provide background and perspectives. As such, the entire book reads like a fascinating conversation recounting the past by a pair of old hands. Unfortunately, against the back drop of the emerging New World Order, Tiananmen and China did not receive a proper billing in their account.

Books about Tiananmen

Document of 1989: President Bush's Secret Letter to Deng Xiaoping

On June 20, 1989, after his attempt to call Deng Xiaoping directly failed, President Bush hand-crafted a  letter himself, initiating a secret top-level contact with China as his attempt to preserving the US-China relationship. Deng Xiaoping responded immediately to the letter.

This letter was later published in Bush's book All the Best (It was also published in A World Transformed, but with more omissions):


His Excellency Deng Xiaoping
People's Republic of China
Beijing

June 20, 1989


Dear Chairman Deng:

I write this letter with a heavy heart. I wish there were some way to discuss this matter in person, but regrettably that is not the case. First, I write in a spirit of genuine friendship, this letter coming as I'm sure you know from one who believes with a passion that good relations between the United States and China are in the fundamental interests of both countries. I have felt that way for many years. I feel more strongly that way today, in spite of the difficult circumstances.

Secondly, I write as one who has great respect for what you personally have done for the people of China and to help your great country move forward. There is enormous irony in the fact that you who yourself have suffered several reversals in your quest to bring reform and openness to China are now facing a situation fraught with so much anxiety.

I recall your telling me the last time we met that you were in essence phasing out of the day-to-day management of your great country. But I also recall your unforgettable words about the need for good relations with the West, your concerns about "encirclement" and those who had done great harm to China, and your committment to keeping China moving forward. By writing you I am not trying to bypass any individual leader of China. I am simply writing as a friend, a genuine "lao pengyou."

It is with this in mind that I write you asking for your help in preserving this relationship that we both think is very important. I have tried very hard not to inject myself into China's internal affairs. I have tried very hard not to appear to dictating in any way to China about how it should manage its internal crisis. I am respectful of the differences in our two societies and in our two systems.

I have great reverence for Chinese history, culture and tradition. You have given much to the development of world civilization. But I ask you as well to remember the principles on which my young country was founded. Those principles are democracy and freedom--freedom of speech, freedom of assemblage, freedom from arbitrary authority. It is reverence for those principles which inevitably affects the way American view and react to events in other countries. It is not a reaction of arrogance or of a desire to force others to our beliefs but of simple faith in the enduring value of those principles and their universal applicability.

And that leads directly to the fundamental problem. The early days of the student demonstration, and indeed, the early treatment of the students by the Chinese Army, captured the imagination of the entire world. The wonder of TV brought the details of the events in Tiananmen Square into the homes of peple not just in "Western" countries but world-wide. The early tolerance that was shown, the restraint and the generous handling of the demonstrations, won world-wide respect for China's leadership. Thoughtful people all over the world tried to understand and sympathize with the enormous problems being faced by those required to keep order; and, indeed, they saw with admiration the manifestation of policy which reflected the leaders' words: "The Army loves the people." The world cheered when Chinese leaders were seen patiently meeting with students, even though there were "sit ins" and even though disorder did interfere with normal functions.

I will leave what followed to the history books, but again, with their own eyes the people of the world saw the turmoil and the bloodshed with which the demonstrations were ended. Various countries reacted in various ways. Based on the principles I have described above, the actions that I took as President of the United States could not be avoided. As you know, the clamor for stronger action remains intense. I have resisted that clamor, making clear that I did not want to see destroyed this relationship that you and I have worked so hard to build. I explained to the American people that I did not want to unfairly burden the Chinese people through economic sanctions.

There is also the matter of Fang Lizhi. The minute I heard Fang was in our Embassay, I knew there would be a high-profile wedge driven between us. Fang was not encouraged to come to our Embassay, but under our widely-accepted interpretation of international law we could not refuse him admittance.

In today's climate I know this matter is of grave importance to you and I know it presents you with an enormous problem; a problem that adversely affects my determination and, hopefully, yours to get our relationship back on track.

We cannot now put Fang out of the Embassay without some assurance that he will not be in physical danger. Similar cases elsewhere in the world have been resolved over long periods of time or through the government quietly permitting departure through expulsion. I simply want to assure you that we want this difficult matter resolved in a way which is satisfactory to you and does not violate our commitment to our basic principles. When there are difficulties between friends, as now, we must find a way to talk them out.

Your able Ambassador here represents your country firmly and faithfully. I feel that Jim Lilley does the same for us; but if there is some special channel that you would favor, please let me know.

I have thought of asking you to receive a special emissary who could speak with total candor to you representing my heartfelt convictions on these matters. If you feel such an emissary could be helpful, please let me know and we will work cooperatively to see that his mission is kept in total confidence. I have insisted that all departments of the US government be guided in their statements and actions from my guidance in the White House. Sometimes in an open system such as ours it is impossible to control all leaks; but on this particular letter there are no copies, not one, outside of my own personal file....

I send you this letter with great respect and deep concern. We must not let this important relationship suffer further. Please help me keep it strong. Any statement that could be made from China that drew from earlier statements about peacefully resolving further disputes with protesters would be very well received here. Any clemency that could be shown the student demonstrators would be applauded worldwide. We must not let the aftermath of the tragic recent events undermine a vital relationship patiently built up over the past seventeen years. I would, of course, welcome a personal reply to this letter. This matter is too important to be left to our bureaucracies.

As I said above, I write with a heavy heart; but I also write with a frankness reserved for respected friends.

Sincerely,

George Bush


Document of 1989

Document of 1989: President Bush's Diaries

In the book A World Transformed, coauthored with his national security adviser Brent Scowcroft, President George Bush included some of his diary entries written in June and July of 1989, reflecting his thoughts immediately after the Tiananmen Massacre. His focus was at preserving the US-China relationship:


June 5, 1989
[Representative Steve] Solarz on the left and [Senator Jesse] Helms on the right want us to move much more radically. Helms has always detested this relationship, and Solarz [, who wants me to recall our Ambassador,] is the guy who wants to overthrow no matter who's involved. He's the kind of guy that was delighted about the overthrow of Shah, not worrying about what follows on.

I talked to Nixon at 8:00 AM, and he was saying, "don't disrupt the relationship. What's happened has been handled badly and is deplorable, but take a look at the long haul." I told him I was not going to recall [Ambassador] Lilley, and he thought that was good. He doesn't think we should stop our trade [and should do] something symbolic, but we must have a good relationship in the long run...and that is what I will try to do while denouncing the violence and abuse of power...The reports from China are still crazy...There are rumors that "Li Peng has been shot," and rumors that "Deng was dead." All of this tells me to be cautious and calm.

June 10, 1989
Dissident Fang is in our embassy, and it turns out his wife may have been supported by unfriendly elements, and this will make the Chinese even more outraged. We had no choice but to take him in, but it's going to be a real stick in the eyes to the Chinese.

At the press conference, I pointed out we weren't sure who was in charge, but then yesterday--the day after the press conference--Deng and Li Peng...reappeared, and the stories are [that] all the hard-liners are in charge. China needs to make a clear statement about reform, and going forward. It would be good if they could make some statement of regret about what happened; but they seem to be circling the wagons, going after students, and showing pictures of soldiers that were abused... I want to preserve the relationship, but I must also make clear that the US cannot condone this kind of human rights brutality. You have the networks, led principally by Dan Rather, pitching everything with the highest emotional content and driving to...almost break relations with China, and that I don't want.

June 20, 1989
...I'm sending signals to China that we want the relationship to stay intact, but it's hard when they're executing people, and we have to respond. We've got to stand for what this country believes in--human rights, right for peaceful protests, etc. They killed three guys yesterday who allegedly burned a train in Shanghai, but I hope they won't go after all the student organizers in Beijing with the same brutality. Dissident Fang is making things much worse and Fang's son showed up at a hearing under the patronage of Jesse Helms--stupid--and it just makes things worse.

It's the morning of Wednesday, June 21. I told Brent Scowcroft that I wanted to [ask] Han Xu if he felt [sending an emmissary] was worth doing. I went to a meeting...and during that hour, Brent talked to Han Xu [who] said he wanted to come over. So within a couple of minutes of Brent having set the appointment up--and without me even knowing about it because he had not had time to get back to me--we got a press inquiry saying, is the President going to meet with Han Xu? Absolutely unbelievable. I walked down to Brent's office to talk about it, and Patty Presock was the only one who had some inkling of it; but the next thing she knew, she got a call from Brent's office, and it was overheard, apparently, by the press office. A terrible situation. So we immediately canceled the meeting. We cannot have a meeting like this in public--it just escalates our concern or attention to the matter.

June 24, 1989
It's June 24th...much to our surprise, on Thursday--less than 24hours later--we got back a personal response [from Deng]. He accepts my idea of a personal emissary. [The question is "who?"] Jim Baker does not want to be undermined, so I thought of a lot of alternatives: Kissinger and Nixon--too high profile, and too much propensity for leakage, though both would be very good; [John] Holdridge or other ambassadors--not enough standing; and Jim Lilley--no good, because of the dissident Fang. I don't want to embarrass Lilley by leaving him out to dry, but I don't want to undermine Baker's running foreign policy. I want to get the best expert who knows Deng--and that is Scowcroft. So on Saturday morning, I proposed to Brent that it be him and Eagleburger, and he's agreeable; I called Baker, and he's agreeable; and so we'll have a meeting on Sunday afternoon.

The plan at this point is to have an over-the-top flight in an unmarked plane going into some Chinese base. It's highly sensitive, China is blasting the United States for interfering in their internal affairs, and we are criticizing China, though not as vociferously as most in the congress would like me to do. This has been a very delicate matter--how to handle this relationship. China is back on track a little with the Soviets, and they could indeed come back in much stronger if we move unilaterally against them and cut them off from the west. Deng still worries about "encirclement," and so do I.

The dissident [Fang] matter is horrible. There was a little squib in intelligence that they might condemn him and kick him out [of the country], and that would be the best answer right now...So far, we're getting reasonable marks for the way we're handling it, and good support from Broomfield, Foley, and Lee Hamilton. The Senate is in a little more disarray, and Lloyd Bentsen told me today that he wants to help. It's highly complex, and yet, I'm determined to try to preserve this relationship--cool the rhetoric. I feel deeply offended by what China has done with the students and the others who courageously stood their ground. And I'm upset that Zhao Ziyang has been kicked out. But I rememebered his lecture to us on reform and "caution." I take this whole relationship very personally, and I want to handle it [that way].

July 9, 1989
It's now July 9th, and we're three hours out on our way to Poland. Down below is a bright blue Atlantic that you can see forever, and the gleaming blue and silver engines on Air Force One are over my right shoulder...China still worries me. We see nothing that I really want China to do in order to solve the existing problem of strained relations, and I don't think any other Western country does. I think they're glad I'm holding the line. They can be out front with more rhetorical overkill, but I will continue to try and hold the line, though I am uneasy about my ability to keep this relationship on track. As long as China tries to say there was no massacre in Tiananmen Square, no lives lost except for the lives of Chinese soldiers, then the matter will not be quiet.

Document of 1989