May 4th, 2012
The Chinese political dissenter and human rights activist/lawyer in mainland communist China, Chen Guangcheng's had escaped and was given refuge by the U.S. Embassy after traveling several hundred miles to get there. (Note: Chinese Dissident Chen Guangcheng's Daring Escape, http://abcnews.go.com/International/chinese-dissident-chen-guangchengs-daring-escape/story?id=16241439.) His escape was even more remarkable when noting the fact that he is blind, reportedly was guarded by a force of 100 soldiers, and in spite of the fact that he was repeatedly beaten by his guards during his captivity. Chen had been under guarded house arrest in mainland China for almost two years after being imprisoned for seven years.
Chen’s crimes against the State of mainland China reportedly consist of his efforts in opposition of state mandated abortions and sterilizations used to control the population growth in China (as couples are allowed to have only one child).
It was widely reported yesterday that a deal had been struck whereby Chen would be returned to the Chinese authorities, much to the chagrin of this blogger. However, after being returned to the Chinese, Chen reportedly said to an Associated Press reporter during a telephone interview that he had been pressured into agreeing to the deal as a result of threats to his family. The cover story of the LA Times yesterday said he was told that his wife would be beaten to death if he did not return. (See: Pall cast over U.S.-China deal over Chinese dissident http://articles.latimes.com/2012/may/02/world/la-fg-china-clinton-chen-20120503.) As to whether he is better to further his cause by staying in China or emigrating to the United States seems to be a source of debate. The reports started to say that Chen would be allowed to study at the Chinese University of his choice. However, of late the reports are saying that Chen will be allowed to leave China for the U.S.
After being returned to the Chinese authorities – who reportedly believe the U.S. to be meddling in their domestic affairs, Chen was reportedly taken to some type of ‘hospital.’ As reported on CBS and ABC evening news, when U.S. authorities attempted to visit Chen in the hospital, the U.S. authorities were denied entry and turned away.
So, in essence, we have a prominent Chinese dissident who escaped from political incarceration and sought refuge from the United States. The United States then promptly returned him to the Chinese authorities who were his captures. Say what? Obviously, the U.S. didn’t want to jeopardize any relations with the Chinese, because where else can we get our stuff made so cheaply by workers willing to work for slave wages?
The whole situation now seems to be confused. But would we really expect it to be any other way, given dealings with a fascist government concerning an individual who potentially speaks poorly of those same fascists? What is their incentive to set him free? As a country that had no problem executing its children and students in Tienanmen Square and apparently continues to force abortions upon pregnant women in its citizenry, what is the death/disappearance of one more? Is the U.S. policy merely to turn a blind eye to the fascists that comprise the Communist party in China? Is the U.S. policy merely one of denial? It surely appears so to this blogger!!
I would hope if a day ever materialized whereby I escaped captivity resulting from my political viewpoints and sought political asylum in another nation, that whatever nation to which I applied for refuge might have more fortitude than displayed by ours/the U.S. displayed in this situation with Chen. Of course, the Chinese could prove to be truthful and allow Chen his freedom – and our current administration would then appear vindicated and all would be well. But at this moment it seems more likely that Chen would have been better served to apply to another nation for asylum (say Canada or the U.K). He could then hope that the nation from which he sought asylum might care more for freedom and human rights than cheap slave labor – as the U.S. administration has seemed to care about cheap labor more than freedom in this situation.
Well, the majority did vote for "Change" in the presidential election of 2008…but where is it? Is this the "Change"? Would prior administrations have also sent Chen Guangcheng back to such an uncertain fate? That is to say, would the other Presidents have also sent Chen back to an uncertain and possibly unjust fate which rests merely on the whim of a historically ruthless regime as the one that currently seems to exist within the People's Republic of China?
After thought, August 7th, 2013:
Well, it appears the dissident is still alive and well for now.
Chinese Dissident Chen Guangcheng on Freedom, Surveillance and Speaking Out