Get out of Here, Your Excellency!
Written by Julen Madariaga on February 24th, 2011I was very disappointed when I read this story about the US ambassador in Beijing taking part in the so-called “Jasmine” protests last Sunday. This is very bad news for Chinese supporters of democracy (yet again).
First of all, let’s be serious. The idea that the ambassador didn’t know what was going on is an insult to intelligence, his appearing on camera lying to a Chinese passer-by only makes things worse. You might argue he was casually walking around, but in a stroll protest walking around is precisely the way to participate. You might believe he was saying the truth, but that would mean he is an incompetent officer, ignorant of the situation on the ground. Clearly that is not the case.
No, the ambassador of the USA has openly and consciously joined a minority protest against the Chinese government in Beijing. Mr. Huntsman’s action is clearly not due to incompetence, but to careful calculation, based on Western vanity and political ambition.
Don’t American politicians understand that democracy can only win if it is seen as homegrown? What would happen if the French ambassador was seen joining a protest for, say, the health reform in the US, would this help further the Democrats’ agenda? Does this kind of action help the millions of real, anonymous Chinese who hope for a more open system? Certainly not.
And of course politicians understand this. They know full well these actions are undermining the democratic movement in China, feeding the nationalistic tide that is the CCP’s most powerful weapon. The problem is they don’t care. Because their priority is not *Democracy in China*, but rather *to be the promoters of Democracy in China*. To publicly score a goal on the enemies of the faith, the intolerable leaders who have dared take China to international success without paying respect to our democratic sensibilities.
I know I am reading too much into this single event, it is unfair to single out American politicians. This is just the natural result of a misconception that the mainstream media establishment in the West has promoted for years: that believing in democracy is in itself a source of legitimacy. That we always know better.
Yes, most of us think that democracy is a better system of government than the CCP rule, and we wish the Chinese people could enjoy it as well. But somehow, in the West, we have come to imagine that our being born in such a system — without having done anything for it in most cases — automatically gives us the moral superiority to decide for others, to smugly disregard fairness and basic respect, and to discount the opinions of those pawns who don’t even know what is good for themselves.
Quite apart from its foolishness, this mindset has to be the number one factor destroying the credibility of democracy supporters worldwide.
Just to avoid misunderstandings: I don’t agree at all those Chinese nationalistic websites. I believe that Human Rights are above any political consideration, and that freedom of speech should be promoted regardless of borders and political systems. I even strongly support direct action to unblock the information channels. We all have the right and the duty to point our fingers where a government has trampled human rights — just as we accept others to point it out when our own own governments do the same.
But we need to understand this is a very different thing from telling the Chinese people how they should think, which minority political action they should join, or even to directly draft for them a political Charter and tell them which elite political figure they should regard as their moral leader.
Rob said:
zhongwen(chinese) said:
Cement Science said:
Mila Beccue said:
CrazyCat said:
Visitor said:
25
AM
May be Mr. Ambassador was also curious… and those (3rd paragraph) are strong accusations. So, I may imply that foreigners should also be out of Tiananmen square from June 3 to 5, so to avoid suspicion? I see many of them when I go there on those days… Yeap I think you may be “reading too much on that single event”.
[Reply to this comment]
hehe Reply:
February 25th, 2011 at 4:21 pm
@kailing,
Let’s follow a bit common sense. An ambassador is not a journalist, the capacity of the position is about diplomacy a lot, a fact I am sure that Mr. Ambassador is fully aware of. To take part, or even getting yourself into a situation in which you could be perceived as taking part, in a local political demonstration in the host country (not even considering the ongoing political sensitivity between his home and his host countries) is only detrimental to fulfilling his capacity as the top US diplomat in China.
His bahaviour is just too much like an old Beijinger who always looks for opportunities of becoming a spectator of a “street event” in order to kill his time. We know he is not an old Beijinger, no matter how much Chinese he can speak. Then what conclusion could we draw? I see two scenarios:
1. He was simply too stupid to see the stupidity of getting himself involved in this crowd incident at the wrong place and at the wrong time.
2. He considered the benefit (whether there is really any benfit is another issue) of participation outweighing the potential cost.
The scenario in which he was not aware of this planned incident is hard to believe. After all, the middle-east revolution didn’t start yesterday and the potential (no matter how “potential” it is) of its spill-over effect on a Chinese “democratic” revolution must have already got some western “journalists” hyper-active (mentally and in disguse perhaps) for a good while. I am sure Mr. Ambassador has been getting periodical reports from his staff and the intelligence agencies from his home country about this too.
I don’t think that Mr. Ambassador is stupid. Then perhaps he must have thought that the benefit outweighed the cost (which may indeed be the case). The cost of his behaviour has been pointed out. What is the beneficial factor that he may have included in his calculation? I am not sure. However, I can at least see three pieces of factual information which were available to his decision making then:
1. He is leaving his dimpomatic post soon.
2. He, allegedly, is a potential contender of the presidency in his home country, a country (i.e. many voters) which embraces the idea of promoting “univeral” “democracy” “all-heartedly”.
3. No matter how remote it was, there was a chance that the “Jasmine” incident could indeed lead to a “jasmine” revolution in China. If that was ever the case, again no matter how small the probabilit is, allow me to borrow a popular catch phrase recently: they(we) are(were) writing history! Wow.
[Reply to this comment]
25
AM
I agree with Julen, this was a publicity stunt by Huntsman. He showed up wearing some jacket with a huge American flag on it and cool shades…
[Reply to this comment]
25
PM
I totally agree with your article. Huntsman’s presence is a disservice, and I am not even sure he was well-meaning.
If he really cares about China’s democratization and people’s livelihood, which hopefully can be changed slightly for the better by calling CCP’s and ordinary people’s attention to the Jasmine Revolution and Chinese discontent, he shouldn’t have stood there as if he were an onlooker to gloat over China’s chaos, and thereby have given CCP supporters and even people on the fence a strong reason to prioritize stability and stamp out any democratic movement: To disillusion foreign countries which try to take advantage of China’s internal problems.
The U.S. embassy and media’s later explanation that Huntsman had no prior knowledge sounds just too hollow and far-fetched.
[Reply to this comment]
25
PM
Look at it this way - Clinton preaches Internet “freedom,” followed by Huntsman (U.S. Embassy) going on Sina Weibo preaching democracy and what not (and censored by Chinese authorities), followed by Twitter calling for ‘jasmine revolution’ in China, and then you get Huntsman caught by Chinese citizen on video at Wangfujing teasing him, “you want chaos for China, don’t you?”
And we also have the Western media going bananas over this non-news. (Head over to ESWN to get a sampling.)
You cannot dismiss the Chinese people criticizing all these retardation coming from the West as simply “nationalistic.”
And, Julen, you’ve been missing from the scene.
[Reply to this comment]
25
PM
I meant blogging scene.
[Reply to this comment]
25
PM
Couldn’t agree with you more!
[Reply to this comment]
25
PM
Thanks for the comments. Feels good to be back.
PS - the blogs are not dead, they are just taking a well deserved break..
[Reply to this comment]
26
AM
“the ambassador of the USA has openly and consciously joined a minority protest”
Looks more like a case of “got joined”. I say those masses of police actually want to “stroll” but they had to be on duty. There are an unknown number of plain clothes cops strolling about, or perhaps they are really “strolling” since they can pretend they’re not on duty. Or are they pretending to be “strolling” to lure more “strollers” out into the open?
How torturous it must be for high ranking officials to avoid protest hot spots that are also weekend hangouts (like Wangfujing) so they don’t “get joined” with the protesters.
Hmm, come to think of it, Mr Huntsman couldn’t get his Micky D’s fix on sunday because of this crowd of uniformed police in the middle of a mile long shopping area.
[Reply to this comment]
26
AM
@cephaloless - it defies reason to imagine that he was not aware of the event when all the press corps in Beijing knew it. Hell even foreign bloggers all over China knew about it, without all the intelligence operative.
An interesting line of speculation is: since he knew about the event, and in spite of it he went with his whole family, then he was sure that it was not going to be violent. A prudent man like him would only risk showing up with family if he had complete assurance of this — ie. he was in direct contact with the organizers from the beginning… I will leave this line of reasoning for the Anti CNN guys, I am sure they are already speculating this way.
In any case, this possibility is not to be ruled out, and I see it more plausible than : “I am a millionaire and ambassador of the USA and I like taking my family to the McD on Sundays” rubbish.
[Reply to this comment]
26
PM
Sorry, “Middle Kingdom” apologists and rationalizers, freedom of expression and thought is for everyone (and I’m not a teabagger).
[Reply to this comment]
27
AM
The ambassador was merely posing in an advance for his political aspirations.
Nothing is coming out of this jasmine stuff in China. Since my first time to China in 2003, the average citizens standard of living and income has soared in comparison to their counterparts in the US.
[Reply to this comment]
27
AM
Bear in mind that the ambassador is human too and can make mistake. Maybe Ambassador Huntsman was truly lost in Wangfujing as his Chinese chauffeur was on leave. As he learned his Mandarin in Taiwan in the 80′s as a missionary - he is probably confused by the local Minnan dialect and Taiwanese Mandarin, in Beijing people speak rapidfire Mandarin with a heavy lace of tongue-twirling and local slang. Ambassador Huntsman is probably disoriented in modern day Beijing and is looking to learn some modern Mandarin in the streets of Wangfujing. Let’s give the old man some credit for trying.
[Reply to this comment]
27
PM
@andrew and others:
All this about the accent… you might be right if it was actually a grassroots protests cooked in the hutongs of Beijing by angry local protesters. But in this “Jasmine revolution” your argument about Beijinghua is irrelevant. This was all was done on the internet, where there is no accents at all.
Moreover, there was as much information about these protests in English as in Chinese (probably more). Anyone who was paying attention on the internet knew about this, even if they didn’t speak Chinese.
[Reply to this comment]
28
AM
I have no doubt that somehow, someway (via the CIA, Mossad, MI5 etc.) the US, UK and the rest of the Western Oligarchy are very much behind the Jasmine Revolutions. These efforts in China appear to be misguided, but that might well be by design. I don’t think the US is quite ready for all out war with China. Even if it is only because destabilizing that nation is just not part of the plan … yet. The Chinese constitute a quarter of the world’s population. That’s a lot of people to shake down and it’s going to take some time for the International Banksters to do it to them the way they have been doing it to the rest of the world.
[Reply to this comment]
FOARP Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 5:27 am
@MarkEdwardHendricks -
1) The Chinese people make up a fifth, not a quarter of humanity.
2) Why, in god’s name, would the CIA, MI6, or Mossad work to overthrow the dictators they have spent years propping up?
3) You seem to think that groups of “international bankers” control the world. I think we’ve heard this somewhere before.
[Reply to this comment]
28
AM
两弹元勋朱光亚逝世
新华网北京２月２６日电 中国共产党的优秀党员，忠诚的共产主义战士，杰出的科学家，我国核科学事业的主要开拓者之一，中国科学院、中国工程院资深院士，中国科学技术协会名誉主席、原主席，中国工程院原院长、党组书记，中国人民政治协商会议第八届、九届全国委员会副主席朱光亚同志，因病于２０１１年２月２６日１０时３０分在北京逝世，享年８７岁。
朱光亚《给留美同学的一封公开信》 (1950)
同学们：
是我们回国参加祖国建设工作的时候了。祖国的建设急迫地需要我们！人民政府已经一而再再而三地大声召唤我们，北京电台也发出了号召同学回国的呼声。人民政府在欢迎和招待回国的留学生。同学们，祖国的父老们对我们寄存了无限的希望，我们还有什么犹豫的呢？还有什么可以迟疑的呢？我们还在这里彷徨做什么？同学们，我们都是在中国长大的，我们受了20多年的教育，自己不曾种过一粒米，不曾挖过一块煤。我们都是靠千千万万终日劳动的中国工农大众的血汗供养长大的。现在他们渴望我们，我们还不该赶快回去，把自己的一技之长，献给祖国的人民吗？是的，我们该赶快回去了。
你也许说自己学的还不够，要“继续充实”、“继续研究”，因为“机会难得”。朋友！学问是无穷的！我们念一辈子也念不完。若留恋这里的研究环境，恐怕一辈子也回不去了。而且，回国去之后，有的是学习的机会，有的是研究的机会，配合国内实际需要的学习才更切实，更有用。若呆在这里钻牛角尖，学些不切中国实际的东西，回去之后与实际情形脱节，不能应用，到时候，真是后悔都来不及呢！
也许你在工厂实习，想从实际工作中得到经验，其实，也不值得多留，美国工厂大，部门多，设备材料和国内相差很远，花了许多工夫弄熟悉了一个部门，回去不见得有用。见识见识是好的，多留就不值得了，别忘了回去的实习机会多得很，而且配合中国需要，不是吗？中国有事要我们做，为什么却要留在美国替人家做事。
你也许正在从事科学或医学或农业的研究工作，想将来回去提倡研究，好提高中国的学术水准。做研究工作的也该赶快回去。研究的环境是要我们创造出来的，难道该让别人烧好饭，我们来吃，坐享其成吗？其实讲研究，讲教学，也得从实际出发，决不是闭门造车所弄得好的。你不见清华大学的教授们教学也在配合中国实际情况吗？譬如清华王遵明教授讲炼钢，他用中国铁矿和鞍山钢铁公司的实际情况来说明中国炼钢工作中的特殊问题。这些，在这里未必学得到。
你也许学的是社会科学：政治、经济、法律。那就更该早点回去了。美国的社会环境与中国的社会环境差别很大，是不可否认的事实。由高度工业化的资本主义社会基础所产生出来的一套社会科学理论，能不能用到刚脱离半殖民地半封建社会基础的中国社会上去，是很值得大家思考的严重问题。新民主主义已经很明显地指出中国社会建设该取的道路。要配合中国社会的实际情况，才能从事中国的社会建设，才能发展我们的社会科学理论。朋友，请想一想，在这里学的一套资本主义的理论，先且不说那是替帝国主义作传声筒，回去怎样能配得上中国的新民主主义建设呢？中国需要社会建设的干部，中国需要了解中国实情的社会学家。回国之后，有的是学习机会。不少回国的同学，自动地去华北大学学习三个月，再出来工作。早一天回去，早一天了解中国的实际政治经济情况，早一天了解人民政府的政策，早一天参加实际的工作，多一天为人民服务的机会。现在祖国各方面都需要人才，我们不能彷徨了！
一点也不错，祖国需要人才，祖国需要各方面的人才。祖国的劳动人民已经在大革命中翻身了，他们正摆脱了封建制度的束缚，官僚资本的剥削，帝国主义的迫害，翻身站立了起来，从现在起，他们将是中国的主人，从现在起，四万万五千万的农民、工人、知识分子、企业家将在反封建、反官僚资本、反帝国主义的大旗帜下，团结一心，合力建设一个新兴的中国，一个自由民主的中国，一个以工人农民也就是人民大众的幸福为前提的新中国。要完成这个工作，前面是有不少的艰辛，但是我们有充分的信念，我们是在朝着充满光明前途的大道上迈进，这个建设新中国的责任是要我们分担的。同学们，祖国在召唤我们了，我们还犹豫什么？彷徨什么？我们该马上回去了。
同学们，听吧！祖国在向我们召唤，四万万五千万的父老兄弟在向我们召唤，五千年的光辉在向我们召唤，我们的人民政府在向我们召唤！回去吧！让我们回去把我们的血汗洒在祖国的土地上灌溉出灿烂的花朵。我们中国要出头的，我们的民族再也不是一个被人侮辱的民族了！我们已经站起来了，回去吧赶快回去吧！祖国在迫切地等待我们
[Reply to this comment]
1
AM
@ULN - Joining in the demonstration would, of course, be extremely stupid, but what of simply being there to observe the proceedings? Is this not what diplomats do in sensitive trials, for example?
Yes, it is inconceivable that he could not have known that a protest was scheduled. Being there in the star-and-stripes get-up was even more stupid. But he did not actually join the demonstrators so although what he did was clearly ill-advised as it risked giving the impression of siding with the demonstrators, it was not as bad as actually doing so.
[Reply to this comment]
hehe Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 5:15 am
@FOARP,
“But he did not actually join the demonstrators so although what he did was clearly ill-advised as it risked giving the impression of siding with the demonstrators, it was not as bad as actually doing so.”
It seems that Mr. Ambassador’s defenders like you are really running out of words now. The absurdity demonstrated in the pathetic excuse you come up with is astonishing. You better say that more bluntly, after all Mr. Ambassador didn’t roll up his sleeves and shout “Jasmine, Jasmine revolution” in front of McDonalds on the day.
I recommend a better approach to you: put your hands on the ears and start singing “la la la la…”.
[Reply to this comment]
FOARP Reply:
March 1st, 2011 at 5:23 am
@hehe - Except I am not defending the ambassador. I have not been arguing in his defence. I am not making an excuse for him. This is the very first thing I have said on the matter.
All I said is that he did not actually side with the demonstrators, he just gave the impression that he was.
It seems you are arguing with someone else, not me.
[Reply to this comment]
1
AM
I still say its a bit paranoid (and probably giving too much credit Huntsman) to pin all that on him. The embassy security guys gave him a thumbs up on a family fun weekend figuring there’s no place particularly dangerous anywhere in the area and off they go. The embassy press release says it’s an unfortunate coincidence that he’s there within visual distance of the protest location in the early afternoon. Who knows, he could have been there all day without making too much commotion until he walked into that crowd (the place is big).
I don’t mean to side track but is Lang Lang any more believable for any particular reason?
[Reply to this comment]
2
PM
comparing a health reform to a jasmine revolution is just like comparing an apple to an orange. what people are calling for in jasmine revolutions are just some little bit more freedom of speech or of any other things and even foreign people like an US ambassador are relevant in such issues.
whether Mr. Huntsman was just passing by or intentionally joined the gathering, I as a Chinese student here in China, would happily thank him for his interest in this event.
[Reply to this comment]
2
PM
well, I personally would appreciate Mr Huntsman for his interest in democracy in china. You said that his action would feed china’s nationalistic tide, or in plain words, make a lot of chinese people angry about america, the question is, if you want to wait for this kind of nationalistic tide to disappear, it would just find a way to live forever, just like when you spoil a child, he would never grow up. to be more accurate, it’s not the ambassador’s behavior that feeds the nationalistic tide, it’s chinese state controlled media like 环球时报 that produces nationalist tide.
and MR huntsman is not in a protest for any health reform or something like that, china lacks many kinds of freedom such that even an ambassador would happily join a protest.
[Reply to this comment]
4
PM
@Dewang: “And, Julen, you’ve been missing from the scene.”
Let’s be fair now - everyone commenting here has probably been missing from the scene. I’m probably closest to the area on a daily basis but I didn’t go because (1) I didn’t know about the events when they occurred and 2) even if I had known, I wouldn’t have expected any turnout.
I don’t see anything wrong calling those protesting this “nationalist” either (given that it’s not used pejoratively). It’s a well-known fact that there are two groups of opinion, euphemistically referred to as “国家利益” and “普世价值.” Maybe we should refer to the first group as “national interest advocates” instead?
And the silent majority in the middle doesn’t know/care about these events.
[Reply to this comment]
4
PM
@Dewang: Sorry, forget about the first comment, I didn’t see your second comment until now. But what do you mean about “blogging scene?” There are all sorts of opinions represented on Xinlang and other sites, although this stuff probably attracts most attention from the “national interest advocates.”
[Reply to this comment]