A John Kusumi Special Comment

These two emperors have no clothes between them.

I say, "free prisoners" and "Hillary Clinton, resign!"

When we think about government ontologically, people are the reason why government exists, and government owes its existence to people. In fact I once produced bumper stickers that said, “People Are Important.”  The governments of China and America talk the talk, as if people are important, but then their actions belie their propaganda. Anyone who calls these governments hypocritical makes an accurate observation.

The matter at hand is the case of Zhou Yongjun, a Chinese dissident who was on the news wires yesterday due to his arrest in China. Both Beijing and Washington are mishandling his case.

Zhou Yongjun in 2007

For background, I can note that I organized the China Support Network in 1989 as a way for Western people to support Chinese democracy -- at the time, many people were sympathetically in favor of the student-led pro-democracy movement, which had just been suppressed at Tiananmen Square. That was an occasion when the Chinese government used mass murder as its method of choice to suppress the students.

Zhou Yongjun was the first President of the Autonomous Federation of Universities in Beijing. Hence, he was a very visible student leader at the outset of that protest movement. Then, he was captured after the massacre and jailed by Chinese authorities until 1991.

Zhou Yongjun in 1989

After that, he settled in the United States for exile. He attempted a return to China in 1998, was captured again, and sentenced through "laojiao" (administrative detention) to three years in a labor camp. He was released in 2001 and returned to the United States in 2002, where he has permanent residency and two children.

Zhou Yongjun in 2002

In September of 2008, he attempted a return to China and was captured again. He was held secretly without charges for the past seven and a half months. Both Beijing and Washington are mishandling his case. In yesterday's news, the AFP news wire quoted me saying,

"It is exceedingly bad form for the Chinese government to create a new Tiananmen-related controversy at the very time that world attention is turning to the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square."

It's more than bad form. The facts at hand indicate that Beiijing and Washington are both misbehaving.

Simply compare and contrast two cases of two U.S.-based dissidents: Yang Jianli and Zhou Yongjun. On Saturday, May 9, Yang attempted to enter China, specifically to visit Hong Kong activists on upcoming matters as the pro-democracy movement commemorates the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square's uprising and massacre.  (Editor’s Note: See the 7-minute Human Rights Watch video, Tiananmen: China’s Unhealed Wound, and, for more historical background, read John’s review of Standoff at Tiananmen, a book by Eddie Cheng.)

The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights says that "Everyone has the right to a nationality" (article 15) and that "Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country" (Article 13).

In our story, what happened to Yang Jianli? The Boston Globe reports:

"Yang said he was provided rice and tea and held for two hours before Chinese authorities put him on a plane back to Taipei.'They treated me OK,' he said. 'They just wouldn't answer any questions.'"

So, there was violation of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, because Yang was refused entry. But it seems that Chinese authorities were somewhat considerate as they arranged his exit flight, and provided rice and tea during the interval between flights.

Now consider, on his attempted return to China, what happened to Zhou Yongjun. He was grabbed by authorities, thrown in the slammer, and held secretly without charges -- perhaps even tortured -- for seven and a half months. This was not the matter of politely serving rice and tea.

Why isn't Zhou on a plane to Taiwan? He is still being held by Chinese jailers, and now they have concocted some trumped-up charges, as they always do for political dissident prisoners. Chinese law says that families must be immediately notified upon the arrest of a family member. This did not happen while Zhou's family endured seven and a half months of uncertainty in his case.

So, there was violation of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, but also violation of Chinese law by its own authorities. Two U.S.-based dissidents each attempted a return to China (and in Zhou's case, it was to visit his elderly parents and his ailing father). One gets tea and a plane ticket, the other gets incarceration and mistreatment. What accounts for the difference in handling these two cases?

The Chinese government could just as easily have refused entry to Zhou in the way that they refused it to Yang. They would still be violating human rights, but at least there would not be an ongoing diplomatic incident in the middle of 20th anniversary commemorations for Tiananmen Square. I can repeat what I told the AFP:

"It is exceedingly bad form for the Chinese government to create a new Tiananmen-related controversy at the very time that world attention is turning to the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square."

Yes, Virginia, the Chinese government is mishandling the case of Zhou Yongjun. In fact, let's consider what else I told the AFP:

"Zhou was stopped when entering China. So, he could not have committed any crime within Chinese jurisdiction. The government's charges are simply not credible."

That's just it. The government lacks credibility in its story. As mentioned, Zhou has been living and working in the United States, where he has permanent residency and two children. If he was stopped upon entry to Chinese territory, then how is it plausible that he could have committed any crime whatsoever on Chinese territory? He could not.

The government's less-than-credible charges are made less credible because they have changed. At first, the government was saying "spying," "espionage," and "political crimes." Those are stock answers, often applied to political dissidents. More recently, the government's charge has changed to "financial fraud." That suggests to me that the evidence was too thin to back up charges of spying, espionage, and political crimes. And, because the world has a recent financial meltdown, and it is suddenly popular to hate financial fraudsters, perhaps the government thinks, "Gee, let's blame it on Majer Zhou." (Majer Zhou is the English name for Zhou Yongjun. Pronounce "Major Joe.")

Zhou is not a credible scapegoat for the state of the economy, and we have seen this kind of behavior from the Chinese government before. After the 9/11 attacks made everyone focus on terrorism, then the charge of "terrorism" became trendy for China to apply to political dissidents such as Wang Bingzhang, another U.S.-based dissident whom the Chinese authorities are still holding today, six years after they sentenced him to lifetime imprisonment.

Wang Bingzhang

The legislatures of Canada and the U.S. have called for the release of Wang Bingzhang, and if China continues holding Zhou Yongjun, then legislative initiatives on his behalf are an upcoming next step. Zhou had applied for U.S. citizenship; I will suggest that the U.S. Congress pass a bill giving him citizenship in absentia. This type of tactic has been employed before in efforts to free prisoners of conscience.

HILLARY CLINTON MUST RESIGN

One reason to give Zhou U.S. citizenship is to light a fire under the U.S. State Department, which has rusted shut in the area of human rights. That rusting shut is not by accident, it is by design -- first by former U.S. President Bill Clinton, and now by his wife Hillary Clinton as the U.S. Secretary of State. The word "Clinton" is a brand name of indifference to human rights, and perhaps a subspecies of slithering sociopaths.

Both Beijing and Washington are mishandling Zhou's case. Let's consider what's up in Washington. The response on the case of Zhou Yongjun makes it seem like the State Department is a branch office of the Chinese Communist Party. I went to the transcript of the Daily Press Briefing of the State Department for May 13, 2009. I copied-and-pasted the relevant exchange into a text file that I named "Blather at State Dept 2009-05-13.txt."

They were ready when the question came up -- the State Department had its boilerplate answer. Spokesman Ian Kelly said:

"We are disturbed by reports that prominent Chinese human rights activist Zhou Yongjun has been charged with fraud after months of detention in China. It is our understanding that contrary to Chinese legal procedure, Mr. Zhou's family was not officially informed until May 13. As you noted, he was one of the student leaders of the Tiananmen Square movement. And the Embassy in Beijing has raised our concerns with the ministry of foreign affairs."

However, the Blather file also caught this jaw-dropping exchange over a follow up question:

Question: So are you looking for him to be released?

Mr. Kelly: We are calling on the government to ensure that all legal and administrative proceedings against him are conducted in a manner that is both transparent and consistent with Chinese law and international human rights norms.

Sometimes, there ought to be translation to help as we interpret the blather of officialdom. The reporter's question was simple enough, "So are you looking for him to be released?" With translation, the answer said, "Nah. This is an occasion for State Department jawboning."

This tells me things. First, I can cancel my plans to write to the Executive Branch of the U.S. Government. Under the axis of Ian Kelly, Hillary Clinton, and Barack Obama, I might as well save my postage stamp. The pressure to free Majer Zhou needs to be focused on Congress and the Chinese embassy. The U.S. Executive Branch never did take its feet off the desk about Tiananmen Square. That now amounts to 20 years of whistling Dixie, from a series of Presidents whom I nominate for a "Mount Rushmore of Corruption."

If anyone asks me, "Who should appear on the Mount Rushmore of Corruption?", my reply is the rhetorical question, "Who has been President since Tiananmen Square?" The more literal answer would be Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama. Barack Obama is exhibiting a Clintonian indifference to human rights, and any embrace of Clintonism is enough to flag a leader as corrupt in my book. Do you suppose that those four men secretly admire mass murderers? Could they be closet Maoists?

The May 13 exchange at the U.S. State Department was shameful. In answer to the simple question, "Are you looking for him to be released?," a simple "yes" answer would have been fitting and appropriate and offered encouragement to the human rights community. May 13 was Ian Kelly's missed opportunity to be remembered on the right side of history. It was also a missed opportunity for Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.

Above, I compared and contrasted Beijing's differing treatment for the cases of Yang Jianli and Zhou Yongjun. I see Zhou's detention as an arbitrary and capricious misuse of government fiat. Ian Kelly wants Zhou to have due process, but in a case that is honked from the get-go, the "international human rights norms" that he holds up are those which I quoted above from the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Under that, Yang and Zhou have the right to return to their country. If the State Department was truly "on the page" with international human rights norms, they would be demanding the release of Zhou. His detention is already indefensible.

The Chinese government has it in their power to put Zhou on a plane to Taiwan, as they did with Yang Jianli. Their capricious and arbitrary behavior is now fully visible in the public handling of this case, during the run up to the 20th anniversary of Tiananmen Square's uprising and massacre. It bears repeating what I said to the AFP: "Zhou was stopped when entering China. So, he could not have committed any crime within Chinese jurisdiction. The government's charges are simply not credible."

Earlier this year, on a trip to China, Hillary Clinton went out of her way to telegraph her intentions to downplay human rights. That was a nod and a wink to the Chinese government. I wonder if she envies the Chinese leaders, because they can be openly Maoist on the one hand, while on the other hand, she has to keep it in the closet and pretend to honor American values? --Well, she's got Ian Kelly to help with jawboning in a manner that I'd describe as "CYA." Kelly, Clinton, and Obama will find the minimum words that they can mouth in order to sound "truthy" on human rights.

Personally, I am not taken in by slithering sociopaths who pose as saviors of the nation. To the Chinese government (and on behalf of the China Support Network), I am demanding the release of Zhou Yongjun, Wang Bingzhang, Liu Xiaobo, Gao Zhisheng, and all prisoners of conscience, and for that government to entirely abandon Maoism.

Liu Xiaobo                                             Gao Zhisheng

Yang Jianli

To the American government (on behalf of myself -- this is not yet a China Support Network campaign), I am calling for Hillary Clinton to resign, and for Barack Obama to entirely abandon Clintonism.

 

Author's Website: www.chinasupport.net

Author's Bio: The author was once the 18-year-old candidate for U.S. President ('84) and later the founder of the China Support Network, post-Tiananmen Square.

www.opednews.com/articles/Scolding-Beijing-and-Washi-by-John-Kusumi-090515-259.html