ChinaAid Editor’s Note: Yesterday (May 4, 2012), one of the Chinese government’s official mouthpieces, Beijing Daily, published an article entitled “Chen Guangcheng—A Tool Used by American Politicians to Discredit China” in which Cultural Revolution-style language was used to denounce the United States. It said the United States was “trying to be clever by creating disturbances and playing the shameless lackey” and that the U.S. Embassy “played a rather dishonorable role, a role that could even be said to be that of a shameless lackey,” and that, along with Ambassador Locke, it had “engage[d] in shameful conduct with ulterior motives that hurt both their national and personal dignity.” Locke was described as “a typical American politician who takes the initiative to stir up contradictions and whirlpools [of trouble].”
What exactly had so enraged the official mouthpiece of the government? In the final analysis, it is that the hasty Sino-U.S. bilateral “agreement” that the Chinese thought was so brilliant—to let Chen Guangcheng leave the U.S. Embassy “of his own volition” so that the incident would quickly disappear from public view—lasted only a brief two days before becoming worthless. What turned the entire incident around so that the Chinese government was no longer in the driver’s seat were media freedom in the West, the resourcefulness and courage of China’s rights defenders and netizens, the U.S. Congress—especially the joint efforts of Speaker of the House Mr. John Boehner, chairman of the House Congressional-Executive Commission on China Mr. Chris Smith, the old friend of the Chinese people Representative Frank Wolf, ChinaAid’s president Pastor “Bob” Xiqiu Fu and others who used the leverage of the democratic system—as well as Chen Guangcheng himself making it clear that his own safety and that of his family could not be ensured and that the whole family wished to go to the United States.
This incident was a source of huge encouragement to the forces of justice in China and all over the world. At the same time, people see the tremendous power of the Internet in bringing shame, fear and ultimately failure on all dishonest politicians and governments. Furthermore, the Obama-Clinton administration should have learned this lesson: hastily negotiated agreements lacking any effective constraints reached with “partners” whose words are not to be trusted and whose actions don’t measure up are totally unreliable. Did those nations who signed agreements with the pre-World War II Nazi government of Germany and the post-World War II Soviet Union learn nothing at all?
Chen Guangcheng—A Tool Used by American Politicians to Discredit China Beijing Daily, May 4, 2012
Translated by China Aid Association (Material in brackets added for ease of comprehension)
If China and the United States are to enjoy a win-win relationship, mutual respect and mutual cooperation must be part of “live and let live.” Trying to be clever by creating disturbances and playing the shameless lackey do not work on China. It only exposes the ugly face of American politicians. Regardless of whether it is the U.S. embassy in China or its ambassador to China, both should observe diplomatic protocol and should not engage in shameful conduct with ulterior motives that hurt both their national and personal dignity. After all, China’s 1.3 billion people are not so easily deceived, nor are they so easily taken advantage of. Attempts to stir up some trouble to interfere in China’s affairs and to blackmail China are really far too naïve.
On the day before the start of the U.S-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, Chen Guangcheng voluntarily left the U.S. embassy in China, which he had entered in an abnormal way six days earlier. The Chinese Foreign Ministry expressed its strong dissatisfaction about this, and demanded that the United States apologize for interfering in China’s internal affairs and guarantee that no such incidents would occur again.
The United States and other Western countries have been paying particularly close attention to Chen Guangcheng for quite some time now. “Packaged” by the American and Western media, this so-called “rights defense hero” has been given an eye-catching political label and held up as an anti-society and anti-establishment symbol. But no matter how one looks at the matter, Chen Guangcheng does not represent many people. What he really represents are the interests of his behind-the-scenes boss, namely Western anti-China forces. Chen Guangcheng has already become a tool of and a pawn used by American politicians to discredit China. However, as such a seemingly important tool and pawn, Chen Guangcheng’s personal demands really fall short of having much weight or structure. On the contrary, it reveals just how eager American politicians are to unhesitatingly try whatever they can to make trouble for Chinese society. Chen Guangcheng and his supporters likely are very clear that such a clumsy performance, other than making a small handful of people happy for a moment, cannot gain the wide support that they seek in Chinese society. Deceiving and taking advantage of 1.3 billion Chinese is not so easy. Thinking that this can be used to interfere in China’s affairs and to blackmail China is really far too naïve.
Problems exist in all types of society and in all social systems. But no country tolerates another country interfering in its internal affairs, nor tolerates the embassies of other countries doing whatever they please and doing their own thing on its own territory, much less allows an ambassador to play the role of judge. Regrettably, in the Chen Guangcheng incident, the U.S. embassy in China deliberately played just such a rather dishonorable role, a role that could even be said to be that of a shameless lackey. Their disregard for international and Chinese laws, for overall U.S.-China relations, and for basic diplomatic protocols leave one speechless. Just imagine! If the embassies of other countries in the United States had excitedly and blatantly welcomed what American politicians called “thugs” and “rioters” in the widespread Occupy Wall Street movement, encouraging them to “launch a revolution now” and to “reshape America,” what would the reaction of the U.S. government have been? Quite likely, the embarrassment to the United States would have been even greater than the tiny disturbance Chen Guangcheng caused in China.
It must be said that what the U.S. embassy in China and its new ambassador to China, Gary Locke, have been doing for a period of time has been incompatible with their duties, and they have constantly been up to their “little tricks.” People cannot help but ask: Is the duty of this ambassador to be actively committed to the development of Sino-U.S. relations and to clear up mutual misunderstanding and lack of understanding, or is it to deliberately find opportunities to make trouble in Chinese society and to create new and larger cracks in Sino-U.S. relations? From his show of being “an ordinary Joe” by flying economy class, carrying his own backpack, and using coupons when buying coffee, to monitoring and publicizing the embassy’s air quality, to getting mixed up in debates about Beijing’s urban management, to presumptuously bringing Chen Guangcheng into the embassy in an abnormal manner, what we see is not a prudent ambassador to China but rather a typical American politician who takes the initiative to stir up contradictions and whirlpools [of trouble]. This kind of conduct that is incompatible with an ambassador’s status, is it intentional or unintentional? If intentional, what is the motivation? And to what purpose? Let everyone think about that for a moment. This farce played out under the direction of the U.S. embassy has deeply educated the Chinese people, and proved once again the classical Chinese saying, “When the weasel pays his respects to the hen, it is not with the best of intentions.” What were their intentions—isn’t it abundantly clear?
If the United States does indeed want to develop long-term, stable and friendly relations with China, it can no longer stubbornly cater to and even encourage the extreme remarks and actions of a handful of people in China and disturb the stability of Chinese society. Likewise, if Gary Locke really wants to be a good ambassador to China, he should be more serious and earnest, and stop being involved in underhanded deals and stop doing ugly things that disgrace him. Otherwise, he will be too clever to be wise.
The import of Sino-U.S. relations today is obvious. However, what is contradictory is that American politicians at the drop of a hat engage in behavior that is immature and undignified, as though they are always looking for ways to find fault with and beat up on China and to stir up trouble in the advancement of Chinese society. The Chen Guangcheng incident is one such example, and to people of good sense, such actions are both silly and inept. Facts show that in Sino-U.S. relations, the main obstacles are on the American side. The United States must learn to respect China’s core interests, and must learn to deal with China on an equal basis. “Do not impose on others what you yourself do not desire” [a Confucian saying]. Creating disturbances in the name of “human rights,” “freedom,” and “democracy” do not work on China. Even less does it benefit the United States. All it does is expose their own ugliness.
To develop a new Sino-U.S. superpower relationship, there must be equality and mutual understanding. Existing differences should be handled appropriately though dialogue and exchange, so as to avoid upsetting the overall Sino-U.S. relationship. It must be said that China’s attitude toward handling the Sino-U.S. relationship has always been consistent, frank, and pragmatic. If China and the United States are to enjoy a win-win relationship, mutual respect and mutual cooperation must be part of “live and let live.” American politicians must give up their messed-up and ulterior motives and start following the playbook of good Sino-U.S. relations if they are to align with the interests of the Chinese and American peoples.
The original Chinese can be found here: http://china.huanqiu.com/politics/2012-05/2686412.html
and here http://www.chinaaid.net/2012/05/blog-post_05.html