Skip to content

China Ready for Nuclear War, Top Chinese Military Official’s Speeches Reveal

[Editor’s note: Chinese General Zhu Chenghu’s statement that China would launch a nuclear war against the United States on conflict over Taiwan on July 15, 2005, sent a shockwave to the whole world. Although Zhu’s claim is the first of its kind in public, he is not alone in voicing such a threat. Two transcripts of a top Chinese military official’s speeches published on Chinese websites prior to Zhu’s public statement echoed the same view. The two related speeches, "The War Is Approaching Us" and "The War Is Not Far from Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century," were believed to be given by Chi Haotian, former Vice Chairman of China’s Central Military Committee and Defense Minister. The speeches argued for the necessity of a biological and nuclear war to destroy Japan and cripple the United States and prepare it for a future massive Chinese colonization.

Independently verifying the authorship of the speech is not possible. However, it is worth reading because it indeed represents the general mentality of the military officials in the hawkish camp in China and is believed to set out the CCP’s strategy for the development of China.

"The War Is Approaching Us" was first posted in January 2003 on websites such as and then on on October 11. It was most recently published on April 23, 2005, on "The War Is Not Far from Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century" was published on February 15, 2005, on Below are the transcripts of the two speeches by Chi Haotian.]

The War Is Approaching Us

By Chi Haotian

Dear Comrades,

It is with a heavy heart that I use this title, but it is used because China’s advancement into modernization has been continuously interrupted due to attacks and direct invasions by external forces. The most typical example is the so-called "Golden Decade" during 1927 to 1937. From today’s perspective, this decade was not at all golden. During this time, the Northeast region of China fell to enemy occupation on September 18, 1931. The East Hebei Province puppet regime was also established during that time. Comparatively speaking though, economic growth was pretty fast; the construction of infrastructure made some progress, and army development was also improved. China started to gain a little bit of hope. But this was something that the Japanese could not tolerate. They were not satisfied with the three Northeastern provinces they occupied, wasting no time in launching a comprehensive invasion of China, a nation compelled to fight the war painstakingly on scorched earth for eight years. Although winning the war, China lost Outer Mongolia and was vitally wounded. The property loss was more than US$600 billion. After eight years of war, the original poor and weak China was in worse economic shape than ever. In other words, Japan’s invasion, especially its comprehensive war on China, greatly slowed down China’s modernization.
Disallowing China’s development and hindering the advance toward modernization had always been the luxury of those countries in power, especially considering Japan’s unchangeable national policy. We have suffered the most painful history lessons regarding this. There is often cooperation between countries, but the most fundamental basis for the relationship between countries is competition, conflict, and at times extreme conflicts; that is, war. Cooperation is temporary and conditional, while competition and conflicts are absolute. They are the true subject of history. That’s why the so-called peace and development spoken of today is incorrect (at best it is simply an expedient measure). In saying this there is no concrete supporting evidence for this statement, and neither does it conform to any factual or historical experiences. Not to mention that China and Japan are sworn enemies both geographically and historically, with even the split between China and the Soviet Union in the 1960s providing evidence to show that any country regards the pursuit of its own national interest as its only criterion for action. No country leaves any space for morality. Over the past, China and the Soviet Union shared the same ideology and faced the same enemies, and China’s low levels of science and technology were not adequate to pose a threat to the Soviet Union. Nonetheless, China and the Soviet Union were split and intensely battled with each other. There may be many reasons contributing to this, but one fundamental reason is that the Soviet Union did not want to see an ever-growing, stronger China existing alongside it. Even though China was only beginning to grow, and would require a long time to reach a condition of strength, the Soviet Union still could not tolerate it.

If China and the Soviet Union, both a weak and a strong country sharing the same ideology and common enemies, could split up, then it is more than obvious that the incantations about "peace and development being today’s main focus," which lead China’s political, military and foreign strategies, is a hallucination—fragile and dangerous.

My statement that peace and development as today’s main focus is completely incorrect, one-sided, and a harmful theory that benumbs people flows from the following reasons.

1. Attacking China’s Modernization Has Always Been a National Policy for the Great Powers

We can obtain an historical rule from the experiences and lessons of China’s modern history, as well as from those of the 50-year history of the People’s Republic of China: Attacking China’s modernization (including launching a comprehensive war) has always been a national policy for the great powers. For the past 160 years it’s been this way. For the future 160 years, it will still remain this way.
2. Development Attracts Danger and Threats; Without the "Right to War" There is No Right to Develop

Development invites danger and threats, and this has been the general rule throughout world history. There were only several exceptions in Chinese history. For example, the Han Dynasty could start to develop with the "door closed" after it had defeated all the other competitors within the geographic limits at that time. It then developed the ideology of "world harmony." Because it was not a matter involving the populace, the military, the economy or culture, there were no competitors, and no other races could compete with the Han race or even have the potential for competition. During the Warring States era (403-222 CE) in ancient Chinese history, one country’s development meant a threat to another country, and this was the universal rule in world history. It is also the core and foundation of Western diplomacy, the father of which was the French cardinal Richelieu, being the first person in the field of Western diplomacy to walk out of medieval "ignorance." He began the tradition of modern diplomacy, which is fully oriented around national interests, discarding all moral and religious restrictions. The diplomacy policy set by Cardinal Richelieu benefited France for over 200 years, making possible the domination of Europe. Richelieu planned the 30-years’ war that caused so much suffering to Germany, and divided it into small feudal regions. This chaos remained until Bismarck reunited Germany. This process of German reunion demonstrates the above rule, as without Bismarck’s "right to war," there would have been no national reunion; not to mention the right to develop.

3. Modernization Under the Saber: China’s Only Choice

The concept of a "China Threat" is definitely correct, and this is a fairly typical Western thought. The Chinese-type thought of, "I close my door to develop my own economy—does this bother anyone?" is not only just foolish, but also does not match up with "international common practice." During the Warring States era there was no room for gentleness and softness in the harsh field of national interests—whoever had the slightest fantasy would be cruelly punished by history. The development of China is definitely a threat to countries like Japan and others. China may not view it in this way itself, but it is impossible for China to change this kind of deep-seated, international common view held by the big powers, which include Japan. So the base point for our thoughts should be and must be, "The development of China is a threat to countries like Japan."

By "right" it is meant that every nation and race should have its living rights and its development rights. For example, China needs to import oil for its economic development, and to import raw materials such as lumber, in order to protect its environment from deforestation. This is very reasonable. But big powers have their own "reasons," and a country like China will need to consume 100 million tons of oil in 2010, and 200 million tons in 2020. Will these big powers tolerate this?
The source of the majority of wars throughout history has been the struggle for basic living resources (including land and ocean). The subject of the conflict will change in the current information era, but the nature of it will remain the same. Developed, advanced civilizations like Israel have fought for over 50 years and are now still fighting with the Palestinians for insignificant areas of land (including the fight for water resources). In order to fight for our very reasonable development rights (unless Chinese are satisfied with the current poverty, and are prepared to give up the right of development), China needs to be prepared for war. This is not decided by us; not by the goodwill of kind people among us, but actually, this is decided by "international common practice," and the big powers around the world.

The 20-years’ policy of peaceful development has reached its end. The international environment has undergone a fundamental change; the big powers have already planned to once again stop China’s progress toward modernization, so China needs to develop, needs to protect its own right to development; and therefore China needs to be prepared for war. Only by being prepared for war can China win space and time for its further development.

Twenty years of pastoral-style development has come to its end; the next program should be and must be, "modernization under the saber."

4. Diplomacy Determines Internal Affairs

At the present time in China, even the most hawkish of hawkish persons would not necessarily advocate war, although we have sufficient reason to do so; for instance, for the unification of the country and the maintenance of rights in the South China Sea. It would be for the right to development, which is extremely cherished since the Chinese have rarely enjoyed it in the past 160 years. But, when this right to development is threatened more and more over time, it is time for us to pick up arms to guard this national right.

It is fitting that internal affairs determines diplomacy, but do not forget that in this Warring States era, diplomacy among major nations also determines internal affairs. This is not just a theoretical viewpoint, it has been an historical experience of the People’s Republic of China. In the 1970s China’s defense spending surpassed expenditure for science, education, culture, and health added together (causing Chinese people to live in poverty). I certainly don’t want the same today; in fact, what is needed the most in China is investment in education. But would the world powers permit it? Wouldn’t one wish to invest more in science, education, culture, and health?

Some have said that, according to the so-called deciphered Soviet documents, it was shown that the Soviet Union did not have comprehensive plans to invade China. Even if the deciphering of these documents was correct, this still cannot explain the reality of that piece of history. Just as a chess game is mutually interactive, because China made sufficient spiritual and material preparations under the leadership of the CCP, it enormously increased the risk and cost for the Soviet Union to invade China. It caused history to completely turn in another direction. The weak figure can only attract aggression. Those who view this from this angle are the true defenders of peace.
5. Evil as Result of Begging for Goodness: Is There Peace for China in the Coming 10 Years?

In order to interrupt the advancement of modernization in China, to deprive Chinese people of the right to development, the world powers have many cards to play. The most obvious three cards are the "three islands," with the most effective one being Taiwan. If war in the Taiwan Straits erupted, the power to make decisions would not be in our hands, nor in the hands of those who advocate Taiwanese independence, but in the hands of the United States and Japan. If such a war erupted, it would not be simply a war of unification, as the deeper implication is that the United States and Japan are determined to deprive China of its right to development. This will once again interrupt the modernization process in China. Just like in the historical Sino-Japanese War of 1894-1895, where Japan comprehensively invaded China, Japan not only made China cede territory and pay indemnities, but in essence interrupted Chinese modernization, while also depriving the Chinese of civil rights.

Therefore, we must look at a Taiwan Straits war on the level of a strategic decisive battle. But based on our present military force, it is out of the question to talk about this aspect from the viewpoints of the United States and Japan, especially that of the United States, because China only has a few intercontinental missiles, and the United States is fully determined to develop National Missile Defense (NMD).

To prevent delaying the eruption of the Taiwan Straits war, this war would first have to be elevated to the level of "a symmetrical strategic decisive battle" using the formula of "fish dead net broken." If we failed to win the Taiwan Straits war, the results would be worse than those following the Sino-Japanese War. Therefore, there must be no war, or we will have to comprehensively destroy Japan and cripple the United States, and this could only be achieved with a nuclear war.

Evil as a result of begging for goodness—this would signal the final end of our present policy. Goodness as a result of asking for evil—only with the power that is capable of totally extinguishing Japan and crippling the U. S. can we win peace; otherwise the Taiwan problem cannot be prolonged for more than 10 years, and there will be war within 10 years!

6. Hegemony Is the Characteristic Signifying the Existence of a World Power

What is a world power? A nation employing hegemony is a world power! One would be slaughtered by others at will, and one’s destiny (including the right to development) would be controlled by others, much as a puppet is controlled. The hegemony in this Warring States era is an objective fact; it "is not to be diverted by human will." The question is, whether you realize it or not; whether it is active pursuit or a passive act. All problems in China, including the three islands problem; the strategic industry development problem; the benefit adjustment of the domestic various social classes problem—in the end are all problems involving the fight for Chinese hegemony.
To have hegemony we cannot have continued internal struggle; we must have internal stability and unity. England, as an example, was able to realize "changing the working class to nobility" long ago because of the huge benefits from overseas colonies. The enormous indemnity that Japan extracted from China not only benefited the Japanese upper levels, but also greatly benefited their lower levels. Times have changed, and national sentiment is different, but the essence is the same. Not only must we look at the military and diplomacy from the point of hegemony, but we must particularly regard the internal stratum and adjustment problems of class interests from the angle of hegemony. Those upper-level people who squeeze and exploit our country’s lower-level people cannot represent the national welfare in this Warring States era. They are decadent, degenerated, unpromising, and should be restricted and eliminated. Only mature and wise upper levels can represent the national welfare in the implementation of "the concession policy" and the lower-level leaders jointly, to catch overseas benefits (this problem is more complex, and will be discussed in detail later. China has enormous opportunities for benefits overseas; it is just that we have not yet actively exploited them.)

Translated by The Epoch Times and authorized for publication in Chinascope.

War Is Not Far from Us and Is the Midwife of the Chinese Century

By Chi Haotian


I’m very excited today, because the large-scale online survey that was done for us showed that our next generation is quite promising and our Party’s cause will be carried on. In answering the question, "Will you shoot at women, children and prisoners of war," more than 80 percent of the respondents answered in the affirmative, exceeding by far our expectations. [1]

Today I’d like to focus on why we asked to conduct this online survey among our people. My speech today is a sequel to my speech last time, [2] during which I started with a discussion of the issue of the three islands, [3] mentioned that 20 years of the idyllic theme of "peace and development" had come to an end, and concluded that modernization under the saber is the only option for China’s next phase. I also mentioned we have a vital stake overseas. Today, I’ll speak more specifically on these two issues.
The central issue of this survey appears to be whether one should shoot at women, children, and prisoners of war, but its real significance goes far beyond that. Ostensibly, our intention is mainly to figure out what the Chinese people’s attitude toward war is: If these future soldiers do not hesitate to kill even non-combatants, they’ll naturally be doubtlessly ready and ruthless in killing combatants. Therefore, the responses to the survey questions may reflect the general attitude people have toward war.

Actually, however, this is not our genuine intention. The purpose of the CCP Central Committee in conducting this survey is to probe people’s minds. We wanted to know: If China’s global development will necessitate massive deaths in enemy countries, will our people endorse that scenario? Will they be for or against it?

As everybody knows, the essence of Comrade Xiaoping’s [4] thinking is "development is the hard truth." And Comrade Jintao [5] has also pointed out repeatedly and empathetically that "development is our top priority," which should not be neglected for even a moment. But many comrades tend to understand "development" in its narrow sense, assuming it to be limited to domestic development. The fact is, our "development" refers to the great revitalization of the Chinese nation, which, of course, is not limited to the land we have now but also includes the whole world.

Why do we put it this way?

Both Comrade Liu Huaqing, [6] one of the leaders of the old generation in our Party, and Comrade He Xin, [7] a young strategist for our Party, have repeatedly stressed the theory regarding the shift of the center of world civilization. Our slogan of "revitalizing China" has this way of thinking as its basis. You may look into the newspapers and magazines published in recent years or go online to do some research to find out who raised the slogan of national revitalization first. It was Comrade He Xin. Do you know who He Xin is? He may look aggressive and despicable when he speaks in public, with his sleeves and pants all rolled up, but his historical vision is a treasure our Party should cherish.

In discussing this issue, let us start from the beginning.

As everybody knows, according to the views propagated by the Western scholars, humanity as a whole originated from one single mother in Africa. Therefore, no race can claim racial superiority. However, according to the research conducted by most Chinese scholars, the Chinese are different from other races on earth. We did not originate in Africa. Instead, we originated independently in the land of China. The Peking Man at Zhoukoudian that we are all familiar with represents a phase of our ancestors’ evolution. "The Project of Searching for the Origins of the Chinese Civilization" currently undertaken in our country is aimed at a more comprehensive and systematic research on the origin, process and development of the ancient Chinese civilization. We used to say, "Chinese civilization has had a history of 5,000 years." But now, many experts engaged in research in varied fields including archeology, ethnic cultures, and regional cultures have reached consensus that the new discoveries such as the Hongshan Culture in the Northeast, the Liangzhu Culture in Zhejiang Province, the Jinsha Ruins in Sichuan Province, and the Yongzhou Shun Emperor Cultural Site in Hunan Province are all compelling evidence of the existence of China’s early civilizations, and they prove that China’s rice-growing agricultural history alone can be traced back as far as 8,000 to 10,000 years. This refutes the concept of "5,000 years of Chinese civilization." Therefore, we can assert that we are the product of cultural roots of more than a million years, civilization and progress of more than 10,000 years, an ancient nation of 5,000 years, and a single Chinese entity of 2,000 years. This is the Chinese nation that calls itself, "descendents of Yan and Huang," the Chinese nation that we are so proud of. Hitler’s Germany had once bragged that the German race was the most superior race on Earth, but the fact is, our nation is far superior to the Germans.
During our long history, our people have disseminated throughout the Americas and the regions along the Pacific Rim, and they became Indians in the Americas and the East Asian ethnic groups in the South Pacific.

We all know that on account of our national superiority, during the thriving and prosperous Tang Dynasty our civilization was at the peak of the world. We were the center of the world civilization, and no other civilization in the world was comparable to ours. Later on, because of our complacency, narrow-mindedness, and the self-enclosure of our own country, we were surpassed by Western civilization, and the center of the world shifted to the West.

In reviewing history, one may ask: Will the center of the world civilization shift back to China?

Comrade He Xin put it in his report to the Central Committee in 1988: If the fact is that the center of leadership of the world was located in Europe as of the 18th century, and later shifted to the United States in the mid 20th century, then in the 21st century the center of leadership of the world will shift to the East of our planet. And, "the East" of course mainly refers to China.

Actually, Comrade Liu Huaqing made similar points in the early 1980s. Based on an historical analysis, he pointed out that the center of world civilization is shifting. It shifted from the East to Western Europe and later to the United States; now it is shifting back to the East. Therefore, if we refer to the 19th century as the British Century, and the 20th century as the American Century, then the 21st century will be the Chinese Century.

To understand conscientiously this historical law and to be prepared to greet the advent of the Chinese Century is the historical mission of our Party. As we all know, at the end of the last century, we built the Altar to the Chinese Century in Beijing. At the very moment of the arrival of the new millennium, the collective leadership of the Party Central Committee gathered there for a rally, upholding the torches of Zhoukoudian, to pledge themselves to get ready to greet the arrival of the Chinese Century. We were doing this to follow the historical law and setting the realization of the Chinese Century as the goal of our Party’s endeavors.

Later, in the political report of our Party’s Sixteenth National Congress, we established that the national revitalization be our great objective and explicitly specified in our new Party Constitution that our Party is the pioneer of the Chinese people. All these steps marked a major development in Marxism, reflecting our Party’s courage and wisdom. As we all know, Marx and his followers have never referred to any communist party as a pioneer of a certain people; neither did they say that national revitalization could be used as a slogan of a communist party. Even Comrade Mao Zedong, a courageous national hero, only raised high the banner of "the global proletarian revolution," but even he did not have the courage to give the loudest publicity to the slogan of national revitalization.
We must greet the arrival of the Chinese Century by raising high the banner of national revitalization. How should we fight for the realization of the Chinese Century? We must borrow the precious experiences in human history by taking advantage of the outstanding fruition of human civilization and drawing lessons from what happened to other ethnic groups.

The lessons include the collapse of communism in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe, as well as the defeat of Germany and Japan in the past. Recently there has been much discussion on the lessons of the collapse of communism in the former Soviet Union and Eastern European countries, so I will not dwell on them here. Today I’d like to talk about the lessons of Germany and Japan.

As we all know, Nazi Germany also placed much emphasis on the education of the people, especially the younger generation. The Nazi party and government organized and established various propaganda and educational institutions such as the "Guiding Bureau of National Propaganda," "Department of National Education and Propaganda," "Supervising Bureau of Worldview Study and Education," and "Information Office," all aimed at instilling into the people’s minds, from elementary schools to colleges, the idea that German people are superior, and convincing people that the historical mission of the Arian people is to become the "lords of earth" that "rule over the world." Back then the German people were much more united than we are today.

Nonetheless, Germany was defeated in utter shame, along with its ally, Japan. Why? We reached some conclusions at the study meetings of the Politburo, in which we were searching for the laws that governed the vicissitudes of the big powers, and trying to analyze Germany and Japan’s rapid growth. When we decide to revitalize China based on the German model, we must not repeat the mistakes they made.

Specifically, the following are the fundamental causes for their defeat: First, they had too many enemies all at once, as they did not adhere to the principle of eliminating enemies one at a time; second, they were too impetuous, lacking the patience and perseverance required for great accomplishments; third, when the time came for them to be ruthless, they turned out to be too soft, therefore leaving troubles that resurfaced later on.

Let’s presume that back then Germany and Japan had been able to keep the United States neutral and had fought a protracted war step by step on the Soviet front. If they had adopted this approach, gained some time to advance their research, eventually succeeded in obtaining the technology of nuclear weapons and missiles, and launched surprise attacks against the United States and the Soviet Union using them, then the United States and the Soviet Union would not have been able to defend themselves and would have had to surrender. Little Japan, in particular, made an egregious mistake in launching the sneak strike at Pearl Harbor. This attack did not hit the vital parts of the United States. Instead it dragged the United States into the war, into the ranks of the gravediggers that eventually buried the German and Japanese fascists.
Of course, if they had not made these three mistakes and won the war, history would have been written in a different fashion. If that had been the case, China would not be in our hands. Japan might have relocated their capital to China and ruled over China. Afterwards, China and the whole of Asia under Japan’s command would have brought into full play the oriental wisdom, conquered the West ruled by Germany and unified the whole world. This is irrelevant, of course. No more digressions.

So, the fundamental reason for the defeat of Germany and Japan is that history did not arrange them to be the "lords of the earth," for they are, after all, not the most superior race.

Ostensibly, in comparison, today’s China is alarmingly similar to Germany back then. Both of them regard themselves as the most superior races; both of them have a history of being exploited by foreign powers and are therefore vindictive; both of them have the tradition of worshipping their own authorities; both of them feel that they have seriously insufficient living space; both of them raise high the two banners of nationalism and socialism and label themselves as "national socialism;" both of them worship "one state, one party, one leader, and one doctrine."

And yet, if we really are to make a comparison between Germany and China, then, as Comrade Jiang Zemin put it, Germany belongs to "pediatrics"—too trivial to be compared. How large is Germany’s population? How big is its territory? And how long is its history? We eliminated eight million Nationalist troops in only three years. How many enemies did Germany kill? They were in power for a transient period of little more than a dozen years before they perished, while we are still energetic after being around for more than 80 years. Our theory of the shifting center of civilization is of course more profound than the Hitler’s theory of "the lords of the earth." Our civilization is profound and broad, which has determined that we are so much wiser than they were.

Our Chinese people are wiser than the Germans because, fundamentally, our race is superior to theirs. As a result, we have a longer history, more people, and larger land area. On this basis, our ancestors left us with the two most essential heritages, which are atheism and great unity. It was Confucius, the founder of our Chinese culture, who gave us these heritages.

These two heritages determined that we have a stronger ability to survive than the West. That is why the Chinese race has been able to prosper for so long. We are destined "not to be buried by either heaven or earth" no matter how severe the natural, man-made, and national disasters. This is our advantage.

Take response to war as an example. The reason that the United States remains today is that it has never seen war on its mainland. Once its enemies aim at the mainland, their enemies would have already reached Washington before its Congress finishes debating and authorizes the president to declare war. But for us, we don’t waste time on these trivial things. Comrade Deng Xiaoping once said, "The Party’s leadership is prompt in making decisions. Once a decision is made, it is immediately implemented. There’s no wasting time on trivial things like in capitalist countries. This is our advantage." Our Party’s democratic centralism is built on the tradition of great unity. Although fascist Germany also stressed high-level centralism, they only focused on the power of the country’s executive, but ignored the collective leadership of the central group. That’s why Hitler was betrayed by many later in his life, which fundamentally depleted the Nazis of their war capacity.
What makes us different from Germany is that we are complete atheists, while Germany was primarily a Catholic and Protestant country. Hitler was only half atheist. Although Hitler also believed that ordinary citizens had low intelligence, and that leaders should therefore make decisions, and although German people worshipped Hitler back then, Germany did not have the tradition of worshipping sages on a broad basis. Our Chinese society has always worshipped sages, and that is because we don’t worship any god. Once you worship a god, you can’t worship a person at the same time, unless you recognize the person as the god’s representative like they do in Middle Eastern countries. On the other hand, once you recognize a person as a sage, of course you will want him to be your leader, instead of monitoring and choosing him. This is the foundation of our democratic centralism.

The bottom line is, only China, not Germany, is a reliable force in resisting the Western parliament-based democratic system. Hitler’s dictatorship in Germany was perhaps but a momentary mistake in history.

Maybe you have now come to understand why we recently decided to further promulgate atheism. If we let theology from the West into China and empty us from the inside, if we let all Chinese people listen to God and follow God, who will obediently listen to us and follow us? If the common people don’t believe Comrade Hu Jintao is a qualified leader, question his authority, and want to monitor him; if the religious followers in our society question why we are allowing belief in God in churches, can our Party continue to rule China?

Germany’s dream to be the "lord of the earth" failed, because ultimately, history did not bestow this great mission upon them. But the three lessons Germany learned from experience are what we ought to remember as we complete our historic mission and revitalize our race. The three lessons are: Firmly grasp the country’s living space, firmly grasp the Party’s control over the nation, and firmly grasp the general direction toward becoming the "lord of the earth."

Next, I’d like to address these three issues.

The first issue is living space. This is the biggest focus of the revitalization of the Chinese race. In my last speech, I said that the fight over basic living resources (including land and ocean) is the source of the vast majority of wars in history. This may change in the information age, but not fundamentally. Our per capita resources are much less than those of Germany’s back then. In addition, economic development in the last 20-plus years had a negative impact, and climates are rapidly changing for the worse. Our resources are in very short supply. The environment is severely polluted, especially that of soil, water, and air. Not only our ability to sustain and develop our race, but even its survival is gravely threatened, to a degree much greater than faced Germany back then.
Anybody who has been to Western countries knows that their living space is much better than ours. They have forests alongside the highways, while we hardly have any trees by our streets. Their sky is often blue with white clouds, while our sky is covered with a layer of dark haze. Their tap water is clean enough for drinking, while even our ground water is so polluted that it can’t be drunk without filtering. They have few people in the streets, and two or three people can occupy a small residential building; in contrast, our streets are always crawling with people, and several people have to share one room.

Many years ago, there was a book titled Yellow Catastrophes. It said that, due to our following the American style of consumption, our limited resources would no longer support the population and society would collapse, once our population reaches 1.3 billion. Now our population has already exceeded this limit, and we are now relying on imports to sustain our nation. It’s not that we haven’t paid attention to this issue. The Ministry of Land Resources is specialized in this issue.

But the term "living space" (lebensraum) is too closely related to Nazi Germany. The reason we don’t want to discuss this too openly is to avoid the West’s association of us with Nazi Germany, which could in turn reinforce the view that China is a threat. Therefore, in our emphasis on He Xin’s new theory, "Human rights are just living rights," we only talk about "living," but not "space," so as to avoid using the term "living space." From the perspective of history, the reason that China is faced with the issue of living space is because Western countries have developed ahead of Eastern countries. Western countries established colonies all around the world, therefore giving themselves an advantage on the issue of living space. To solve this problem, we must lead the Chinese people outside of China, so that they could develop outside of China.

The second issue is our focus on the leadership capacity of the ruling party. We’ve done better on this than their party. Although the Nazis spread their power to every aspect of the German national government, they did not stress their absolute leadership position like we have. They did not take the issue of managing the power of the party as first priority, which we have. When Comrade Mao Zedong summarized the "three treasures" of our party’s victory in conquering the country, he considered the most important "treasure" to be developing the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and strengthening its leadership position.

We have to focus on two points to fortify our leadership position and improve our leadership capacity.

The first is to promote the "Three Represents" theory, [8] stressing that our Party is the pioneer of the Chinese race, in addition to being the pioneer of the proletariat. Many citizens say in private, "We never voted for you, the Communist Party, to represent us. How can you claim to be our representatives?"
There’s no need to worry about this issue. Comrade Mao Zedong said that if we could lead our allies to victory and make them benefit, they would support us. Therefore, as long as we can lead the Chinese people outside of China, resolving the lack of living space in China, the Chinese people will support us. At that time, we don’t have to worry about the labels of "totalitarianism" or "dictatorship." Whether we can forever represent the Chinese people depends on whether we can succeed in leading the Chinese people out of China.

The second point, whether we can lead the Chinese people out of China, is the most important determinant of the CCP’s leadership position.

Why do I say this?

Everyone knows that without the leadership of our Party, China would not exist today. Therefore, our highest principle is to forever protect our Party’s leadership position. Before June 4, we realized vaguely that as long as China’s economy is developed, people would support and love the Communist Party. Therefore we had to use several decades of peacetime to develop China’s economy. No matter what -isms, whether it is a white cat or a black cat, it is a good cat if it can develop China’s economy. But at that time, we did not have mature ideas about how China would deal with international disputes after its economy is developed.

Comrade Xiaoping said then that the main themes in the world were peace and development. But the June 4 riot gave our Party a warning and gave us a lesson that is still fresh. The pressure of China’s peaceful evolution makes us reconsider the main themes of our time. We see that neither of these two issues, peace and development, have been resolved. The Western oppositional forces always change the world according to their own visions; they want to change China and use peaceful evolution to overturn the leadership of our Communist Party. Therefore, if we only develop the economy, we still face the possibility of losing control.

That June 4 riot almost succeeded in bringing a peaceful transition; if it were not for the fact that a large number of veteran comrades were still alive and at a crucial moment they removed Zhao Ziyang and his followers, then we all would have been put in prison. After death we would have been too ashamed to report to Marx. Although we have passed the test of June 4, after our group of senior comrades pass away, without our control, peaceful evolution may still come to China like it did to the former Soviet Union. In 1956, they suppressed the Hungarian Incident and defeated the attacks by Tito’s revisionists of Yugoslavia, but they could not withstand Gorbachev 30 some years later. Once those pioneering senior comrades died, the power of the Communist Party was taken away by peaceful evolution.
After the June 4 riot was suppressed, we have been thinking about how to prevent China from peaceful evolution and how to maintain the Communist Party’s leadership. We thought it over and over but did not come up with any good ideas. If we do not have good ideas, China will inevitably change peacefully, and we will all become criminals in history. After some deep pondering, we finally come to this conclusion: Only by turning our developed national strength into the force of a fist striking outward—only by leading people to go out—can we win forever the Chinese people’s support and love for the Communist Party. Our Party will then stand on invincible ground, and the Chinese people will have to depend on the Communist Party. They will forever follow the Communist Party with their hearts and minds, as was written in a couplet frequently seen in the countryside some years ago: "Listen to Chairman Mao, Follow the Communist Party!" Therefore, the June 4 riot made us realize that we must combine economic development with preparation for war and leading the people to go out! Therefore, since then, our national defense policy has taken a 180 degree turn and we have since emphasized more and more "combining peace and war." Our economic development is all about preparing for the need of war! Publicly we still emphasize economic development as our center, but in reality, economic development has war as its center! We have made a tremendous effort to construct "The Great Wall Project" to build up, along our coastal and land frontiers as well as around large and medium-sized cities, a solid underground "Great Wall" that can withstand a nuclear war. We are also storing all necessary war materials. Therefore, we will not hesitate to fight a Third World War, so as to lead the people to go out and to ensure the Party’s leadership position. In any event, we, the CCP, will never step down from the stage of history! We’d rather have the whole world, or even the entire globe, share life and death with us than step down from the stage of history!!! Isn’t there a ‘nuclear bondage’ theory? It means that since nuclear weapons have bound the security of the entire world, all will die together if death is inevitable. In my view, there is another kind of bondage, and that is, the fate of our Party is tied up with that of the whole world. If we, the CCP, are finished, China will be finished, and the world will be finished.

Our Party’s historical mission is to lead the Chinese people to go out. If we take the long view, we will see that history led us on this path. First, China’s long history has resulted in the world’s largest population, including Chinese in China as well as overseas. Second, once we open our doors, the profit-seeking Western capitalists will invest capital and technology in China to assist our development, so that they can occupy the biggest market in the world. Third, our numerous overseas Chinese help us create the most favorable environment for the introduction of foreign capital, foreign technology, and advanced experience into China. Thus, it is guaranteed that our reform and open-door policy will achieve tremendous success. Fourth, China’s great economic expansion will inevitably lead to the shrinkage of per-capita living space for the Chinese people, and this will encourage China to turn outward in search for new living space. Fifth, China’s great economic expansion will inevitably come with a significant development in our military forces, creating conditions for our expansion overseas. Even since Napoleon’s time, the West has been alert for the possible awakening of the sleeping lion that is China. Now, the sleeping lion is standing up and advancing into the world, and has become unstoppable!
What is the third issue we should clinch firmly in order to accomplish our historical mission of national renaissance? It is to hold firmly onto the big "issue of America."

Comrade Mao Zedong taught us that we must have a resolute and correct political orientation. What is our key, correct orientation? It is to solve the issue of America.

This appears to be shocking, but the logic is actually very simple.

Comrade He Xin put forward a very fundamental judgment that is very reasonable. He asserted in his report to the Party Central Committee: The renaissance of China is in fundamental conflict with the Western strategic interest, and therefore will inevitably be obstructed by the Western countries doing everything they can. So, only by breaking the blockade formed by the Western countries headed by the United States can China grow and move toward the world!

Would the United States allow us to go out to gain new living space? First, if the United States is firm in blocking us, it is hard for us to do anything significant to Taiwan and some other countries! Second, even if we could snatch some land from Taiwan, Vietnam, India, or even Japan, how much more living space can we get? Very trivial! Only countries like the United States, Canada and Australia have the vast land to serve our need for mass colonization.

Therefore, solving the "issue of America" is the key to solving all other issues. First, this makes it possible for us to have many people migrate there and even establish another China under the same leadership of the CCP. America was originally discovered by the ancestors of the yellow race, but Columbus gave credit to the white race. We the descendents of the Chinese nation are entitled to the possession of the land! It is said that the residents of the yellow race have a very low social status in the United States. We need to liberate them. Second, after solving the "issue of America," the Western countries in Europe would bow to us, not to mention to Taiwan, Japan, and other small countries. Therefore, solving the "issue of America" is the mission assigned to CCP members by history.

I sometimes think how cruel it is for China and the United States to be enemies that are bound to meet on a narrow road! Do you remember a movie about Liberation Army troops led by Liu Bocheng and Deng Xiaoping? The title is something like "Decisive Battle on the Central Plains." There is a famous remark in the movie that is full of power and grandeur: "The enemies are bound to meet on a narrow road, only the brave will win!" It is this kind of fighting to win or die spirit that enabled us to seize power in mainland China. It is historical destiny that China and the United States will come into unavoidable confrontation on a narrow path and fight each other! The United States, unlike Russia and Japan, has never occupied and hurt China, and also assisted China in its battle against the Japanese. But, it will certainly be an obstruction, and the biggest obstruction! In the long run, the relationship of China and the United States is one of a life-and-death struggle.
One time, some Americans came to visit and tried to convince us that the relationship between China and United States is one of interdependence. Comrade Xiaoping replied in a polite manner: "Go tell your government, China and the United States do not have such a relationship that is interdependent and mutually reliant." Actually, Comrade Xiaoping was being too polite; he could have been more frank, "The relationship between China and United States is one of a life-and-death struggle." Of course, right now it is not the time to openly break up with them yet. Our reform and opening to the outside world still rely on their capital and technology, we still need America. Therefore, we must do everything we can to promote our relationship with America, learn from America in all aspects, and use America as an example to reconstruct our country.

How have we managed our foreign affairs in these years? Even if we had to put on a smiling face in order to please them, even if we had to give them the right cheek after they had hit our left cheek, we still must endure in order to further our relationship with the United States. Do you remember the character of Wuxun in the movie the "Story of Wuxun"? In order to accomplish his mission, he endured so much pain and suffered so much beating and kicking! The United States is the most successful country in the world today. Only after we have learned all of its useful experiences can we replace it in the future. Even though we are presently imitating the American tone "China and United States rely on each other and share honor and disgrace," we must not forget that the history of our civilization repeatedly has taught us that one mountain does not allow two tigers to live together.

We also must never forget what Comrade Xiaoping emphasized "refrain from revealing the ambitions and put others off the track." The hidden message is: We must put up with America; we must conceal our ultimate goals, hide our capabilities and await the opportunity. In this way, our mind is clear. Why have we not updated our national anthem with something peaceful? Why did we not change the anthem’s theme of war? Instead, when revising the Constitution this time, for the first time we clearly specified "March of the Volunteers" is our national anthem. Thus we will understand why we constantly talk loudly about the "Taiwan issue" but not the "American issue." We all know the principle of "doing one thing under the cover of another." If ordinary people can only see the small island of Taiwan in their eyes, then you as the elite of our country should be able to see the whole picture of our cause. Over these years, according to Comrade Xiaoping’s arrangement, a large piece of our territory in the North has been given up to Russia; do you really think our Party Central Committee is a fool?

To resolve the issue of America we must be able to transcend conventions and restrictions. In history, when a country defeated another country or occupied another country, it could not kill all the people in the conquered land, because back then you could not kill people effectively with sabers or long spears, or even with rifles or machine guns. Therefore, it was impossible to gain a stretch of land without keeping the people on that land. However, if we conquered America in this fashion, we would not be able to make many people migrate there.
Only by using special means to "clean up" America will we be able to lead the Chinese people there. This is the only choice left for us. This is not a matter of whether we are willing to do it or not. What kind of special means is there available for us to "clean up" America? Conventional weapons such as fighters, canons, missiles and battleships won’t do; neither will highly destructive weapons such as nuclear weapons. We are not as foolish as to want to perish together with America by using nuclear weapons, despite the fact that we have been exclaiming that we will have the Taiwan issue resolved at whatever cost. Only by using non-destructive weapons that can kill many people will we be able to reserve America for ourselves. There has been rapid development of modern biological technology, and new bio-weapons have been invented one after another. Of course we have not been idle; in the past years we have seized the opportunity to master weapons of this kind. We are capable of achieving our purpose of "cleaning up" America all of a sudden. When Comrade Xiaoping was still with us, the Party Central Committee had the perspicacity to make the right decision not to develop aircraft carrier groups and focus instead on developing lethal weapons that can eliminate mass populations of the enemy country.

From a humanitarian perspective, we should issue a warning to the American people and persuade them to leave America and leave the land they have lived in to the Chinese people. Or at least they should leave half of the United States to be China’s colony, because America was first discovered by the Chinese. But would this work? If this strategy does not work, then there is only one choice left to us. That is, use decisive means to "clean up" America, and reserve America for our use in a moment. Our historical experience has proven that as long as we make it happen, nobody in the world can do anything about us. Furthermore, if the United States as the leader is gone, then other enemies have to surrender to us.

Biological weapons are unprecedented in their ruthlessness, but if the Americans do not die then the Chinese have to die. If the Chinese people are strapped to the present land, a total societal collapse is bound to take place. According to the computation of the author of Yellow Peril, more than half of the Chinese will die, and that figure would be more than 800 million people! Just after the liberation, our yellow land supported nearly 500 million people, while today the official figure of the population is more than 1.3 billion. This yellow land has reached the limit of its capacity. One day, who knows how soon it will come, the great collapse will occur any time and more than half of the population will have to go.

We must prepare ourselves for two scenarios. If our biological weapons succeed in the surprise attack [on the United States], the Chinese people will be able to keep their losses at a minimum in the fight against the United States. If, however, the attack fails and triggers a nuclear retaliation from the United States, China would perhaps suffer a catastrophe in which more than half of its population would perish. That is why we need to be ready with air defense systems for our big and medium-sized cities. Whatever the case may be, we can only move forward fearlessly for the sake of our Party and state and our nation’s future, regardless of the hardships we have to face and the sacrifices we have to make. The population, even if more than half dies, can be reproduced. But if the Party falls, everything is gone, and forever gone!
In Chinese history, in the replacement of dynasties, the ruthless have always won and the benevolent have always failed. The most typical example involved Xiang Yu the King of Chu, who, after defeating Liu Bang, failed to continue to chase after him and eliminate his forces, and this leniency resulted in Xiang Yu’s death and Liu’s victory (during the war between Chu and Han, just after the Qin Dynasty (221-206 B.C.) was overthrown). Therefore, we must emphasize the importance of adopting resolute measures. In the future, the two rivals, China and the United States, will eventually meet each other in a narrow road, and our leniency to the Americans will mean cruelty toward the Chinese people. Here some people may want to ask me: what about the several millions of our compatriots in the United States? They may ask: aren’t we against Chinese killing other Chinese?

These comrades are too pedantic; they are not pragmatic enough. If we had insisted on the principle that the Chinese should not kill other Chinese, would we have liberated China? As for the several million Chinese living in the United States, this is of course a big issue. Therefore in recent years, we have been conducting research on genetic weapons, i.e. those weapons that do not kill yellow people. But producing a result with this kind of research is extremely difficult. Of the research done on genetic weapons throughout the world, the Israelis’ is the most advanced. Their genetic weapons are designed to target Arabs and protect the Israelis. But even they have not reached the stage of actual deployment. We have cooperated with Israel on some research. Perhaps we can introduce some of the technologies used to protect Israelis and remold these technologies to protect the yellow people. But their technologies are not mature yet, and it is difficult for us to surpass them in a few years. If it has to be five or ten years before some breakthroughs can be achieved in genetic weapons, we cannot afford to wait any longer.

Old comrades like us cannot afford to wait that long, for we don’t have that much time to live. Old soldiers of my age may be able to wait for five or ten more years, but those from the period of the Anti-Japanese War or the few old Red Army soldiers cannot wait any longer. Therefore we have to give up our expectations about genetic weapons. Of course, from another perspective, the majority of those Chinese living in the United States have become our burden, because they have been corrupted by the bourgeois liberal values for a long time and it would be difficult for them to accept our Party’s leadership. If they survived the war, we would have to launch campaigns in the future to deal with them, to reform them. Do you still remember that when we had just defeated the Koumintang (KMT) and liberated mainland China, so many people from the bourgeois class and intellectuals welcomed us so very warmly, but later we had to launch campaigns such as the "suppression of the reactionaries" and "Anti-Rightist Movement" to clean them up and reform them? Some of them were in hiding for a long time and were not exposed until the Cultural Revolution. History has proved that any social turmoil is likely to involve many deaths. Maybe we can put it this way: Death is the engine that moves history forward. During the period of Three Kingdoms, [9] how many people died? When Genghis Khan conquered Eurasia, how many people died? When Manchu invaded the interior of China, how many people died? Not many people died during the 1911 Revolution, but when we overthrew the Three Great Mountains, [10] and during the political campaigns such as "Suppression of reactionaries," "Three-Anti Campaign," and "Five-Anti Campaign" at least 20 million people died. We were apprehensive that some young people today would be trembling with fear when they hear about wars or people dying. During wartime, we were used to seeing dead people. Blood and flesh were flying everywhere, corpses were lying in heaps on the fields, and blood ran like rivers. We saw it all. On the battlefields, everybody’s eyes turned red with killing because it was a life-and-death struggle and only the brave survived.
It is indeed brutal to kill 100 or 200 million Americans. But that is the only path that will secure a Chinese century, a century in which the CCP leads the world. We, as revolutionary humanitarians, do not want deaths. But if history confronts us with a choice between deaths of Chinese and those of Americans, we’d have to pick the latter, as, for us, it is more important to safeguard the lives of the Chinese people and the life of our Party. That is because, after all, we are Chinese and members of the CCP. Since the day we joined the CCP, the Party’s life has always been above all else! History will prove that we made the right choice.

Now, when I am about to finish my speech, you probably understand why we conducted this online survey. Simply put, through conducting this online survey we wanted to know whether the people would rise against us if one day we secretly adopt resolute means to "clean up" America. Would more people support us or oppose us? This is our basic judgment: If our people approve of shooting at prisoners of war, women, and children, then they would approve our "cleaning up" America. For over 20 years, China has been enjoying peace, and a whole generation has not been tested by war. In particular, since the end of World War II, there have been many changes in the formats of war, the concept of war and the ethics of war. Especially since the collapse of the former Soviet Union and Eastern European Communist states, the ideology of the West has come to dominate the world as a whole, and the Western theory of human nature and Western view of human rights have increasingly disseminated among the young people in China. Therefore, we were not very sure about the people’s attitude. If our people are fundamentally opposed to "cleaning up" America, we will, of course, have to adopt corresponding measures.

Why didn’t we conduct the survey through administrative means instead of through the Web? We did what we did for a good reason.

First of all, we did it to reduce artificial inference and to make sure that we got the true thoughts of the people. In addition, it is more confidential and won’t reveal the true purpose of our survey. But what is most important is the fact that most of the people who are able to respond to the questions online are from social groups that are relatively well-educated and intelligent. They are the hard-core and leading groups that play a decisive role among our people. If they support us, then the people as a whole will follow us; if they oppose us, they will play the dangerous role of inciting people and creating social disturbance.

What turned out to be very comforting is they did not turn in a blank test paper. In fact, they turned in a test paper with a score of over 80. This is the excellent fruition of our Party’s work in propaganda and education over the past few decades.
Of course, a fe

A Defector’s Story

Mr. Chen Yonglin met us for coffee in a suburban hotel outside of Washington, D.C. "Now I don’t have to worry about being sent back to China," he told us. Chen is a former Chinese diplomat who recently defected to Australia. This Chinese insider caused an uproar in the Australian media when he exposed the extensive Chinese spy network in Australia and the Australian administration’s policy of appeasing China. The Chinese communist regime was so angry at being exposed that it sent a hit squad to Australia to assassinate him. He was here in Washington to testify before a House of Representatives International Relations Subcommittee hearing on Human Rights. Chen shared with Chinascope his inner struggle as a Chinese diplomat and the reason why he decided to leave his post and his country.

From a Red Diplomat to a Defector

Growing Up Under the Red Flag

Like most of those who were born in the 1960s in China, Chen had a simple life trajectory. In 1968, he was born into an intellectual family in Zhejiang Province. Scoring high in the national college-entrance exam, he was admitted in 1985 to the China University of Foreign Affairs. He graduated in 1991 with a double bachelor’s degree in Foreign Affairs and in English. In his 14-year diplomatic career in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, he worked on political analysis and twice went on a mission to Australia. Before defecting to Australia last May, he was the First Secretary and Consul for Political Affairs in the Chinese Consulate General in Sydney.

Chen grew up during the Cultural Revolution, a period of chaos and tragedy that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) and its leader Mao Zedong brought upon China. In 1966 Chairman Mao, out of his need to solidify his power and forever change China, started the Cultural Revolution that brought the Chinese populace into revolutionary, feverish, political struggles. Law and order were trampled in Chen’s hometown, just like everywhere else in China. His father, a graduate from the elite Tsinghua University, was put in a vocational home in 1971. Later, when the village leaders brought cases against some villagers, the villagers asked him to write out their appeals. When he did, the village leaders arrested him and tortured him to death. Chen was only three years old when his father died. His brother was five and his sister was two. His mother earned 24 yuan (~US$3.00) per month as an elementary school teacher in the village, and the family of four could barely survive. The tragic death of his father cast a shadow on Chen; it made him study harder and think more deeply.
In Beijing Foreign Affairs College

Upon entering the University of Foreign Affairs in 1985, at the age of 15, Chen began to read Western philosophy books. China’s economic reform at the time led to an intellectual opening to the West. Non-communist books and ideas became selectively available in the universities and pro-democratic thinking was gaining support among students. At that point, he realized the cause of his father’s tragic death: It was not just due to a few bad individuals; it was caused by the inhumane political system itself.

The pro-democratic student movement in 1989 marked Chen’s life. He was a fourth-year student at the University of Foreign Affairs in Beijing. He was also interning at NBC and guided its camera crew. One day, he saw a Western reporter jot down, "Communism is on the brink of collapse." Chen could not believe the prediction. The communist system had been the only political system he knew throughout his life. He couldn’t imagine any other political system emerging. Like many students, the life-long communist brainwashing shackled Chen’s mind. However, the Communist Bloc in Eastern Europe did indeed collapse within a few months, and Chen came to admire that Western journalist’s foresight. Chen believes that the journalist’s prediction is finally coming true in China; he thinks that the CCP is falling apart.

Like most of his classmates, in June 1989, Chen witnessed the People’s Liberation Army shooting the peaceful protestors and bystanders. He saw the bloody crackdown on the night of June 3 in Beijing. The PLA shot three students from the University of Foreign Affairs, severely wounding one. Afterward, the government denied that the PLA ever opened fire on the students. Instead they labeled the student movement a "riot." In order to get their graduation certificates from the University, Chen and his classmates had to write letters saying they regretted their participation in the Tiananmen Square uprising.

A Diplomat’s Contradiction

After graduation, Chen became a staff member in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA). It appeared he was a lucky man with a good future. Working in the government guaranteed him a decent salary and a chance to travel on missions to foreign countries. He was the envy of his peers. During the years of his mission to Fiji and later to Australia, he researched local political affairs and followed major elections in Oceanic countries. His research enabled him to make pretty accurate predictions. Although his future as a young diplomat looked bright, Chen found his life depressing.

First, freedom of thought is not allowed in the MFA. The Ministry tells its staff that even regarding trivial matters the diplomats have no right to decide anything. They have to seek instruction from the central leaders. The Ministry has a motto, "Nothing is trivial in foreign affairs." In the name of national interest, low-level personnel must act as mindless machines in the government apparatus.
Second, distrust is the rule in the MFA. The MFA required all new staff members to participate in "political study" sessions for a year. Such long-term brainwashing was used on them because they were the "Tiananmen generation," the students who experienced the 1989 student movement. Actually, the MFA’s distrust of its own staff goes beyond the Tiananmen generation. Inside the Chinese foreign mission, every ordinary staff member is treated with suspicion. They have to live together in the dorms inside the Chinese mission. The senior staff randomly and arbitrarily searches their personal mail. At least two people must go together when attending any outside functions so that they can monitor each other. It is forbidden to make personal friends outside the Chinese Consulate. When a staff member goes outside the Consulate, he must first get approval from his supervisor and afterward he must report whom he has met.

Third, the performance of assignments may mean working against your own conscience. Chen’s promotion to the First Secretary for Political Affairs in the Consulate General in Sydney put him into a position where he often had to act against his conscience. He eventually realized that he had to defect in order to be true to himself and to secure his family’s safety.

In Charge of Suppressing Falun Gong

Chen reported to his new post in 2001. At that time, one of the central tasks in Chinese "political affairs" was the suppression of Falun Gong. Falun Gong is a form of personal cultivation, or qi-gong practice for mind and body that has its roots in traditional Chinese culture. It was the most popular qi-gong practice in the 1990s and many Chinese could be seen doing the exercises in the early morning. Because Falun Gong attained great popularity, however, in July 1999, the Chinese government decided to eliminate it. By 2001, by resorting to a variety of means including firing practitioners from their jobs, expelling them from school or subjecting them to detention, prison, brainwashing, and even torture and killing, the Chinese government severely abated Falun Gong practitioners’ protests in China. Outside of China, however, Falun Gong practitioners in many countries openly protested the persecution. Their public protests drew attention to China’s human rights violations and won international sympathy for the group. Consequently, the Chinese government ordered its diplomatic missions to make the suppression of overseas Falun Gong activities a top priority. Chen was assigned to take charge of the "struggle with Falun Gong" in the Consulate General.

Before he left for Australia, Chen was not familiar with Falun Gong and did not pay much attention to the persecution. People of his age had seen many political struggles and had become "numb." In a short time, his new assignment made him understand Falun Gong and the persecution very well.
The department of Political Affairs in the Consulate General has the primary responsibility for monitoring Falun Gong and for coordinating with other departments in the Consulate. This monitoring is not limited to searching the Internet and reading newspapers. It also includes attending the Falun Gong activities to collect their handouts and to take pictures of the participating practitioners. The Political Affairs department was able to get a state-paid vehicle assigned to its division so that it could follow Falun Gong practitioners, which it did frequently. As part of his duties, Chen regularly compiled the information on Falun Gong collected by the Consulate and sent a report to the MFA in Beijing. In his contacts with Falun Gong practitioners, Chen gradually found out that these practitioners were in fact nice individuals who should not be labeled as "state enemies."

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs set up an Office of the Falun Gong Issue. It operates under the "610 Office" an agency so named because it was formed on June 10, 1999. The Chinese government vested the "610 Office" with absolute power over each level of administration in the Party and over all other political and judiciary systems in order to persecute Falun Gong. "The Central 610 Office" apparently has other channels to spy on Falun Gong. Chen regularly received briefs from the MFA on overseas activities of Falun Gong, including things happening in Australia. The central government created a database containing information on overseas Falun Gong practitioners. The Chinese consulates have access to the database for the purpose of identifying Falun Gong practitioners as well as dissidents and others it wants to monitor. This database is known as the "blacklist" inside the circle. When a person goes to the Chinese Consulate to apply for an entry visa or, in the case of a Chinese citizen, to apply for a passport renewal, his or her name will be searched in the database. If the person’s name appears on the blacklist, his case will be "specially treated." If a Falun Gong practitioner applies for a visa application or passport renewal, he or she will be interviewed and persuaded to give up practicing Falun Gong. He or she has to show evidence of being persuaded by submitting a written "guarantee" to the Consulate. If the applicant refuses to comply, then the visa application or passport renewal will be rejected.

Chen explained his experience with Falun Gong, saying, "I found two characteristics in those Falun Gong practitioners: one is honesty, the other is kindness. When I ask someone if he is a Falun Gong practitioner, it’s very easy to know the answer. A practitioner either will admit it or will simply keep silent, but he will not tell a lie. Taking advantage of their honesty, the Consulate can easily identify them from all the other applicants coming to the visa office, and put their names in a database. We call it the blacklist. The Consulate has a policy toward the practitioners. If they come to renew their passport, we confiscate it. Unless they agree to write a ‘guarantee’ to renounce Falun Gong, we do not give it back, in order to make their lives more difficult. Normally most Chinese will not hesitate to write such a non-binding statement just to get things done with the Consulate, but Falun Gong practitioners are different. They will not betray their conscience."
Chen gradually changed his attitude toward Falun Gong practitioners, but at the same time he had to work on the assignment to suppress that same group of nice people. Chen saw a conflict between his career and his conscience.

Besides the "blacklist" that was centrally compiled and maintained by the Ministries of State Security and Public Security, each overseas consulate also created its internal blacklist of local Falun Gong practitioners. The difference between the two types of blacklists is how detailed and how accurate the information is. When sufficient information about a practitioner is reported to the State Security and Public Security Ministries, his or her information, including name, date of birth, passport number, address, and other personal information, is entered into the central blacklist. That central blacklist is accessible to all Chinese embassies and consulates around the world and to border checks in mainland China. The case will be immediately red-flagged if a person on that blacklist applies for entry to China.

The embassies and consulates in respective countries maintain their own local lists, which are normally not shared with other offices. Those local blacklists contain only incomplete information about the suspected Falun Gong practitioners. The Consulate needs to further complete the information. When Chen first arrived in Sydney, the Consulate’s blacklist had over 800 names of Falun Gong practitioners. Many of the entries contained just a name, and it was expected that Chen would complete the records. His conscience, however, led him to do the opposite.

Out of his sympathy for the practitioners and his discontent toward the persecution, Chen started to remove names from the internal blacklist. By the time Chen left his post, he had shrunk the blacklist to about 120 names. Chen’s successor planned to arrive in Sydney in early June and Chen would have to hand his files over to her. Chen realized that eventually the MFA would find out what he did to the blacklist. The Chinese communist government does not tolerate sympathy toward Falun Gong within its ranks. There had been reports that some government officials who helped Falun Gong practitioners ended up in forced labor camps.

Six Weeks of Hiding and Anxiety

Filled with fear and despair, Chen walked away from the Consulate General in Sydney on May 26 and asked the Australian government for asylum. Thus started his difficult path of breaking from the Chinese communist regime.
Chen later publicly acknowledged that, "To break with the communist regime is the most joyful choice of my life and yet the most difficult to make." However, within 24 hours, the Australian government rejected his application for political asylum. Chen knew that some officials inside the Australian government were eager to appease the Chinese government. Yet he had confidence that, in a democratic system, human rights would not be traded for business. The reality however was disappointing.

Chen found out on May 26 that the Australian government informed the Chinese Consulate about his seeking protection. The immigration officials actually contacted the Chinese Consulate to "check identity." Chen believed that action put him in danger and he immediately went into hiding. On May 31, 2005, Chen met with an official from the Australian Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT). He was told that his application for political asylum had been refused, but he could apply for a refugee protection visa instead. These Australian officials repeatedly told Chen that people at the Chinese Consulate were worried about him. They urged him to consider going back.

The refugee protection visa normally takes months to process. It appeared to Chen that it was a way for DFAT to win the Chinese Consulate time to get Chen back. It was later confirmed in an Australian Senate inquiry that the decision to reject Chen’s asylum application came from the Foreign Affairs Minister Alexander Downer. In addition, Downer told Parliament that he had spoken to the Chinese ambassador, Fu Ying, about the matter before Chen went public.

Chen went to the public for help. On June 4, 2005, he showed up at a public rally in Sydney commemorating the Tiananmen Square Massacre of 1989. Chen made a speech at the rally, announcing that he had left the Chinese Consulate and was seeking political asylum because he detested the Chinese government’s violation of human rights, and because he sympathized with the Falun Gong practitioners under persecution. He expressed fear for his life, as he was facing the risk of being sent back to China and jailed. Chen told reporters that he had discovered that Chinese agents were searching for him.

Chen also disclosed to the public that there were about 1,000 Chinese secret agents and informants in Australia, and that agents from China had committed acts of kidnapping on Australian soil. At the rally, Chen also saw faces from the Consulate.

On the same day, Chen submitted a public statement to the Chinese-language newspaper The Epoch Times‘ "Quitting the CCP" website to formally renounce his membership in the Chinese Communist Party.
Chen’s story drew a lot of public attention. While Chen and his family continued to stay in hiding, Australians questioned whether their government sold out his human rights to the Chinese government. The Australian parliament became very concerned, holding inquiries and hearings to determine whether the administration handled Chen’s asylum case properly. At the same time, the Chinese Embassy tried hard to do damage control, both in the public media and behind closed doors, to discredit Chen and to make a deal with the Australian officials for Chen’s return. A former colleague of Chen’s from the Consulate told him that Chinese authorities were "100 percent sure" that they would be able to take him back to China.

Fortunately for Chen, the Australian media intensively covered Chen’s stories. They scrutinized what seemed to be suspicious dealings between the Australian and the Chinese governments. One security expert told Australia’s media that the administration’s handling of Chen’s asylum was a "monumental bungling, or there’s something more sinister." Chen’s case soon became a hot potato for both governments. Then, on July 8, Australia granted a permanent protection visa to Chen and his family. Six weeks previously, his asylum application was almost instantaneously rejected. Thanks to the publicity, the 24 hours it took for approval of his protection visa was one of the quickest in Australia’s history. Chen was relieved when he finally got the protection. He can now look to the future for a new life of freedom.

Communist China’s Strategy for Australia

In recent years, people have noticed a number of incidents of the Australian administration appearing to sell out human rights principles in order to appease the Chinese communist leaders:

From March 2002 to June 2005, Foreign Minster Downer issued 38 certificates in succession to prevent protesting Falun Gong practitioners from using banners and amplified music in front of the Chinese Embassy in Canberra. On June 8, 2005, practitioners filed a lawsuit against Downer in the Australian Capital Territory’s Supreme Court in Canberra, seeking an injunction to stop the ban.

In July 2004, political dissident Yuan Hongbing, the dean of a Chinese law school, and his assistant Ms. Zhao Jing applied for asylum when they arrived in Australia on an official tour. It was right before the Chinese foreign minister, Tang Jiaxuan, was to visit Australia. The Australian government, in an apparent act of appeasement, rejected Ms. Zhao’s asylum application in less than a week, leaving overseas Chinese dissidents stunned.
In May 2005, almost 50 Chinese refugee applicants held in Australian immigration detention centers were put in isolation for up to two and a half weeks and interrogated by officials of the Chinese government. According to the Asylum Seeker Resource Center, "Basically, the Chinese officials were given carte blanche to interview anyone who was Chinese. That included those who were seeking asylum from the Chinese government. It’s unbelievable that the Australian government allowed their potential persecutors to interrogate them and get their details, including those of their families and children."

Chen knows the inside stories.

"Turn Australia into a Second France"

"China seeks to make Australia part of its ‘great border zone,’" Chen said. "They want to turn Australia into a second France that will not side with the United States."

In February of 2005, Zhou Wenzhong, the Chinese Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs at that time and now Beijing’s ambassador to Washington, held a meeting at the Chinese Embassy in Australia with the ambassadors and consul-generals to Australia and New Zealand, and consuls in charge of political affairs. Chen attended that meeting.

"The main focus was how to implement the decision that was made during the 10th Meeting of the Chinese Envoys in Foreign Counties held in mid-August of 2004, at the suggestion of Hu Jintao, to make Australia part of the ‘Great Border Zone’ of China. All the consulates were asked to present their view and ideas for the next step," said Chen.

During the meeting, Zhou Wenzhong shared information about the CCP central government’s strategic plan for Australia and the United States, worrying about the close ties between these two democratic countries. The Central Committee was determined to break the military alliance between them and turn Australia into a second France. Chen explained, "They hope to shape Australia into a country that dares to say, ‘No’ to the United States." He claimed that it was all part of Communist China’s global strategy.

The paramount Chinese communist leader Deng Xiaoping laid out a strategy for China: "Hide our capabilities, and bide our time." The communist regime, after 30 years of class struggle from 1949 to 1979, brought China to the brink of economic collapse. Deng wisely figured out that in order to save the regime it must halt political struggles and make economic development its top priority. The Chinese communist leaders fully believe that "sooner or later there will be an inevitable war between the United States and Communist China." The Party leadership recognizes the need to "bide time" to modernize and prepare China for that "inevitable" battle. According to Chen, "The Chinese Communist Party considers the United States to be its largest enemy, the major strategic rival." He pointed out how important it is to understand this U.S. factor in analyzing China’s diplomacy.
By the end of the 20th century, China declared it had reached a milestone in its economic development: China became a well-off society. The CCP started to look to its next goal: By 2020, before the Party’s 100th birthday, China should be able to contend with the United States in overall strength. According to the CCP’s calculations, China will dominate the Asian and Pacific region, while Europe will continue forming its own union and move further away from the Atlantic Alliance; the United States will continue to dominate North and Central America. If things go this way, China will arise as a regional superpower within two decades. Australia is not within those regional blocks, but its abundant natural resources and strategic South Pacific location is very attractive to the ambitious CCP leaders, and the U.S.-Australia military alliance agreement is a concern for the Chinese invasion of Taiwan.

The Hot Sweet Business Deals

In 2002, China sensed that Australia was rethinking its business trade strategy, planning to give up ties with Asia in favor of stronger ties with the United States. At that time, the free trade negotiations between Australia and the United States were at a high point. Australia had high hopes of being included in the North America Free Trade Agreement. At the same time, Australia was bidding for a large deal with Guangdong Province in China.

The Chinese government sent its foreign minister Tang Jiaxuan to Australia in March 2002 to find out how China could be more attractive to Australia. In August, a few months after Tang’s visit, surprising news was published: China awarded a multi-billion-dollar contract to Australian consortiums to supply liquefied natural gas (LNG) to Guangdong Province for over 25 years. The contract, which was worth US$13.5 billion, had been open for bid for some time. Many analysts believed that the Indonesian company would win the contract. Out of its intention to win over Australia, the Chinese central government made sure the contract was awarded to Australia. To console Indonesia, it then offered an alternative not previously on the negotiation table.

Following that sweet treat, the Australian government became eager to promote business relations with China. According to a People’s Daily report, the overall annual trade value between the two countries has doubled in two years, reaching AUS$20.5 billion in 2004. Different from China-U.S. trade where China enjoys a big trade surplus, China imports more from Australia than it exports. Australia became a major metal supplier for China. Of all of the wheat China imports, the largest amount is from Australia. Close to 300,000 Chinese visited Australia on business travel between 2003 and 2004, and 163,000 more went as private tourists. Some Australian analysts estimate that up to 30 percent of Australia’s economic growth is due to increased export to China. At the same time, Chinese companies, many of which are state controlled, have started to invest directly in the Australian mining and energy industries. According to Chen, China is eager to get access to all of the mines in Australia.
The Human Rights Sacrifice

The sweet deals from China came at a price. The first thing that the Australian government had to do was to sacrifice human rights.

During his visit in March 2002, Chinese Foreign Minister Tang Jaixuan raised questions on certain issues, including Falun Gong. The Australian officials responded eagerly. On the day before Tang arrived in Canberra, Alexander Downer, the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, signed an article banning Falun Gong practitioners from setting up signs and banners or using loud speakers to protest in front of the Chinese Embassy. "His move made the Chinese leadership very happy," noticed Chen.

In 2002, China held a 30-year anniversary celebration of the diplomatic relations between Australia and Communist China. The Chinese government sent many groups to Australia to promote Chinese culture and political ideology. Australia became a favored destination for high-level Chinese officials. It was understood that the host government would protect the "dignity of their mission."

"When Hu Jintao visited Australia in 2003, he received unprecedented protection in Canberra," said Chen. "Bob Brown, a Congressman with the opposition party Greens, was not allowed to enter the building where Congress was being held. The idea was to stop dissidents and Falun Gong practitioners from attending as the Congressman’s guests. Hu Jintao was delighted and commented to his staff that this was a sign that the Australian government could be influenced."

In 2005, when Wu Bangguo, the head of the Chinese National Assembly, visited Australia, he requested the same treatment: not to see or hear any protestors or dissidents.

A Disturbing Trend

Chen’s defection has brought to light how the communist regime has transformed a democratic government into its lapdog. Under the cover of bilateral relations in business and trade and of cultural exchange, the communist regime is eroding fundamental human principles and gradually infiltrating the West. Stories of the Australian government’s work with the Chinese government are good examples of how the communist regime infiltrates and erodes Western democracy.

Chen stated in an interview, "I have witnessed in my past four years working with the Chinese Consulate that the Australian government, especially the Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade (DFAT), has made a lot of compromises on sensitive issues of human rights and Chinese democracy issues."
For example, Chen claims the Australian government aided the Chinese authorities in quashing a lawsuit filed earlier this year in the Supreme Court of New South Wales by Australian citizens who practice Falun Gong. The lawsuit targeted the ex-president of China Jiang Zemin and the Gestapo-like "610 Office" for torture, genocide, and other crimes against humanity. According to Chen, the Downer Government offered legal assistance to China and worked in cooperation with Chinese authorities. If Chen’s claims are true, Downer is guilty not just of ignoring China’s abuses of human rights, but of actively condoning them.

On June 8, 2005, several Falun Gong practitioners launched legal action against Australian Foreign Minister Alexander Downer in the Australian Capital Territory’s Supreme Court, alleging that his department has unfairly limited their freedom of expression by banning their banners across the road from the Chinese Embassy. Downer first issued the certificates on March 16, 2002. The certificates indicate that the banners should be removed, because they "impair the dignity of the [Chinese] mission." On March 28, 2002, federal police confronted Falun Gong practitioners who were holding a peaceful appeal in front of the Chinese Embassy. According to eyewitnesses, police acting under the Foreign Minister’s orders, forcefully removed banners bearing messages that included, "Stop the killing" and "Truth, Compassion, Forbearance." The ban continues to this day because Downer continues to sign similar certificates every month. (Each signing is only valid for a maximum of 30 days.)

Falun Gong practitioners are seeking an injunction to prevent Downer from issuing certificates under the Diplomatic Privileges and Immunity Regulations, which prevent the use of banners in their human rights appeal outside the Chinese Embassy in Canberra.

The Australia Department of Foreign Affairs said that the rules are in line with an international agreement on the protection of the dignity and security of embassy staff.

Bernard Colleary, the lawyer representing the plaintiffs, said that this case is a test case for freedom of expression in Australia and urged Downer to fall in line with the pronouncements of the Australia Federal Court.
"Explosive" Testimony in the U.S. Congress

Congressman Chris Smith, Chairman of the U.S. House of Representatives International Relations Subcommittee on Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations, invited Chen to speak to this subcommittee. Chen flew to Washington, D.C., to testify in front of the subcommittee on July 21, on the subject of Falun Gong and China’s continuing war on human rights.

All of the Congressmen present at the hearing strongly supported Chen’s testimony. Similar hearings concerning the persecution of Falun Gong have been held in the U.S. House of Representatives. In previous years, Congress passed resolutions to condemn the persecution in China. Chen, however, is the first witness who had direct information and evidence from working inside the Chinese Consulate.

Chen told the subcommittee that the CCP’s persecution of Falun Gong is a systematic campaign. All the authorities, especially in the offices of Public Security, State Security, and Foreign Affairs are involved in the persecution. The directing center for the persecution is "The CCP Central Office of Handling the Falun Gong Issue," (the previously mentioned "610 Office"). The government later changed the name to "The Office of Preventing and Handling the Evil Cult Problem of the State Council," and the insiders always used the name, "The Central 610 Office." Massive and extremely harsh measures have been taken against Falun Gong practitioners in China.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs set up the "Office of the Falun Gong Issue," operating under the general office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, as part of the "610 Office" system. In July 2004, it changed its name to the "Department of External Security Affairs." In each Chinese mission overseas, there must be at least one official in charge of Falun Gong affairs.

In February 2001, the Chinese Consulate General in Sydney set up the "Special Group for Struggling Against the Falun Gong." This group is part of the "610 Office" system. Its sole task is to monitor and suppress Falun Gong. Similar Special Groups have been established in the Chinese missions in the United States and other countries where Falun Gong is active.

According to Chen, besides the diplomatic system, there is an intelligence system working against Falun Gong as well. There are over 1,000 Chinese secret agents and informants in Australia, and the number in the United States is at least that many. The CCP’s foreign policy on Falun Gong is to "fight intensely and give no ground, to attack at will, and aggressively."

Chen ended his testimony by saying, "Obviously, there is no freedom of religion and beliefs under the dictatorship of the CCP. The CCP should be stopped from persecuting the Falun Gong and other religious groups."

After Chen’s testimony, Congressman Chris Smith, Chairman of the Human Rights Subcommittee, commented, "Thank you very, very much. I know members in the committee realize your testimony is absolutely explosive for a man who worked for the government of the People’s Republic of China to come before a House committee that deals with human rights, and to tell us in such clear and unambiguous words that there is a war on the Falun Gong going on in China that is not just within the confines of the People’s Republic of China, but it is worldwide."

Victor Gu and Stephen Tian are correspondents for Chinascope.

Chinese President’s U.S. Package Falls Short

Chinese President Hu Jintao will attend the U.N. 60th anniversary summit in New York on September 13. Before his U.N. mission, he is scheduled to visit Canada, Mexico and Washington, D.C. and have meetings with the North American leaders.

The U.S. trip will be the first one for Hu Jintao since he came to power in March 2003. Publicly, the meeting between Hu and Bush is expected to focus on issues over trade, Taiwan relations and North Korea’s nuclear program, among other things.

But the Chinese President seems to be more concerned with the scale of his U.S. reception than what will be talked about in the meeting. After more than two years since his ascension to the top position in China, Hu is eager to break out of the shadow of his predecessors and establish his own legacy. The visit to North America, particularly the meeting with U.S. President Bush, is therefore a very significant event, designed to bolster his image back in China as a recognized world leader.

Initially, Bush offered his Texas ranch to accommodate Hu, a perfect opportunity to discuss bilateral relations in a more relaxed environment and make real progress. But in the Chinese leader’s mind, "barbecue at Bush’s ranch" would be too casual and not in keeping with his image. Hu prefers a formal "state visit," complete with red carpet, a 21-gun salute at the White House, a state banquet, and joint statements before the media.

Prior to the trip, China demonstrated its goodwill toward Washington in expectation of a "state visit." On July 21, Beijing announced for the first time that it would allow the Chinese yuan to appreciate by two percent; on July 26, it restarted the six-party talks on North Korea’s nuclear weapons; and on July 28, it announced the purchase of 50 airplanes from Boeing.

These gestures were not enough for Washington to grant him a "state visit." Instead, Hu was offered a "working visit" to meet with Bush for one hour at the White House on September 7. There will be no state banquet, either. White House spokesman Trent Duffy told reporters, "It is not an official state visit." Instead of a state dinner, Bush will host a luncheon for Hu at the White House.

To the Chinese leader, such an offer from Washington must be very disappointing. In order to save face, China’s state-run media continues to interpret it as a "state visit." In response to reporters’ questions, the spokesperson of Foreign Affairs Ministry Qing Gang stated, "Invited by President Bush, President Hu Jintao will make a state visit to the United States between September 5 and 8." Nevertheless, Hu should have gotten the messagethe United States is wary of the course that China is taking.
Before Hu took office, many people had high expectations for him, believing that he would loosen China’s political controls, which would lead to a more open society. But the signs so far indicate that Hu is continuing the communist tradition and assuming an even harder-line approach. Hu is particularly strict on media control and has even vowed to learn from Cuba and North Korea to govern the country.

On August 2, 2005, China issued new rules restricting foreign investment in cultural products and media in China. According to the new government regulations reported by China’s state media, Xinhuanet, China will not permit any more overseas satellite television channels to land on its mainland and will not allow any foreign investment in the country’s news media.

Hu is also applying greater pressure on Taiwan. At the 2005 National People’s Conference, China passed a secession law giving China the "right" to attack Taiwan at any perceived signs of Taiwan independence. Beginning on August 18, 2005, China held an unprecedented, joint military exercise with Russia on China’s Shandong Peninsula. The eight-day military exercise involved nearly 10,000 troops from the two armies, navies, and air forces as well as airborne units, marine corps and logistics units. Although China, which footed the bill for the joint exercise, stated that it was not aimed at any specific target, many viewed Taiwan and the United States as the imagined enemies. Following the exercise, China also signed a massive arms deal with Russia to further put pressure on Taiwan and the United States.

From the Editor

Amidst predictions of the 21st century being "China’s century," China has steadily gained prominence over the past decade. Few discussions about trade and the global economy go by without China getting involved. The upcoming attendance of China’s President Hu Jintao in the 60th U.N. Summit in New York and his visit to North America are drawing a new wave of attention to the already hot topic of China’s present and ongoing role in the world.

For each of the past 10 years, China has been claiming a close to double-digit economic expansion spurred by unbridled international investment and is looking to become one of the world’s largest economies. Many tend to believe that China will be the driving force for future economic development, so no country can afford not to engage with China. On the other hand, China’s communist leadership refuses to budge on its repressive political system. At the same time, Beijing’s government is spending extravagantly on military build-up and modernization, thanks to its newfound economic muscle. Many have asked themselves: Is China’s rise a blessing or a threat to the world?

There are certainly arguments for both. To counter the "China threat" theory, Hu Jintao introduced the concept of "peaceful rise" through his top think tank assistant Long Yongtu at an international forum in 2004. While Hu has won some believers, recent developments in China do not bode well for a benign outcome. One recently defected Chinese diplomat’s story, featured in this issue, is particularly disconcerting. The Chinese government has been following former Chinese leader Deng Xiaoping’s plan of "biding our time, building up our capabilities, and striking when the time is right." China is also using trade prospects to win over its neigboring countries and Western democracies such as France and Australia. Meanwhile, many view Beijing’s repeated saber-rattling toward Taiwan and related nuclear strike threats to the United States as warning signs of a belligerent, oppressive regime fueled by a powerful economya dicey proposition indeed.

Hu Jintao will likely continue to harp on China’s "peaceful rise" in his visit to North America. For sure, China needs a peaceful environment for it to prosper, and the world is hoping for the same. However, as long as China’s political landscape remains that of a totalitarian communist regime, the concept of such a peaceful rise is dubious, no matter how Hu spins it.


News Briefs

North Korea Exports Drugs to China

[, Aug. 4, 2005] The number of drug smuggling cases has dramatically increased along the China-North Korea border within recent years. The more than 500-kilometer-long border (over 300 miles), home to one million ethnic Koreans, has become another drug zone along with southwest, southeast, and northwest China. Chinese police have seized drugs including crystal meth, solid heroin, ecstasy, yaba, and morphine. In just the first half of 2005, Chinese police in the northeast have had as many as 21 drug smuggling cases, involving more than 200 kilograms (about 440 lbs.) of drugs.

Top Kelon Heads Detained for Alleged Fraud

[, August 1, 2005] Gu Chujun, Chairman of the Board of Kelon, the well-known Chinese refrigerator and air-conditioner maker, was detained by police, along with Vice-President Yan Yousong, and Assistant to the President Jiang Yuan, for allegedly using 700 million yuan (US$43.4 million) of Kelon’s money fraudulently. The China Securities Regulatory Commission (CSRC) is currently continuing its investigation into Kelon.

Beijing Faces Population Crisis

[Beijing Evening News, Aug. 1, 2005] Beijing is facing a maximum capacity crisis. By 2008, the population will reach 15 million; by 2010, 15.55 million; and by 2025, 17 million. After 2025, the population will level out around 16 million. According to experts, by 2010 the elderly population (age 60 and over) will reach 2.17 million, accounting for 14 percent of the total population. The peak of the aging population will be in 2045, when senior citizens will make up 38 percent of the population.

Beijing’s International Students on the Rise

[Central News Agency, July 25, 2005] According to estimates, by 2008 Beijing will have 80,000 international students. Experts of Chinese language studies worry that, facing the global popularity of the Chinese language, there will be a severe shortage of Chinese language teachers in Beijing as well as in the rest of China.

Officials in Sichuan Province Change Vehicle Plates by Pressing a Button

[Chongqing Evening News, July 26, 2005] An electric license plate-changing system installed in some government officials’ vehicles in Sichuan Province enables an eye-catching government official’s license plate to suddenly become an ordinary license plate at the touch of a button. It is reported that this kind of vehicle can be easily found next to luxurious businesses such as famous restaurants, nightclubs, saunas, and spas. For those cars that cannot change plates, business owners will cover both front and back plates tightly with a "fig leaf." After installing this face-changing equipment, some officials only need to press a button to show off their power and prestige, or to do something forbidden while not exposing their official identities.{mospagebreak}

Chinese Vice-Premier Comforts Army Forces in Xinjiang to Prevent Rebellion

[Central News Agency, Aug. 3, 2005] According to reports from the East Turkistan Information Center, Vice-Premier Huang Ju traveled to Xinjiang recently to comfort army forces stationed in the region. The trip was made to prevent the army from rebelling against the Chinese government, and to ensure stability during the Oct. 1, 2005, 50-year anniversary celebration of the establishment of the Uyghur Autonomous Region of Xinjiang.

Hong Kong University Professor Upsets Beijing, Ordered to Stop Bird Flu Research

[Apple Daily, July 18, 2005] Professor Guan Zhi, a virologist from Hong Kong University, enraged Beijing by exposing the fact that the Qinghai Bird Flu came from southern China, which contradicts statements made by the Chinese government. On July 9, 2005, authorities came to his Flu Research Center in Shangtou University and demanded that researchers destroy or hand in all flu samples. According to officials from the Agricultural Department, an order had been given to stop the Flu Research Center from conducting further bird flu research.

China Jams Sound of Hope Radio Broadcasts

[The Epoch Times, Aug. 7, 2005] Many audiences of the Sound of Hope International Radio Network in all areas of mainland China recently gave feedback to the radio network saying that, the daily four-hour broadcast to China has suffered severe jamming from the Chinese Communist Party and hence they could not receive the radio network’s program at all. A non-profit organization, The Sound of Hope Radio Network was established in 2003 in San Francisco, and has gained rapid popularity in the Chinese community. During these two years, the radio network has accumulated close to 20,000 broadcasting programs and interviews across the network, and has established branch stations in more than 30 cities in four continents world wide, and has been broadcasting into mainland China for four hours daily through shortwave.

Serious Pollution Harms Yellow River

[Xinhuanet, July 10, 2005] "A stench assailing the nostrils from 100 yards away, and churning black water constantly producing white foam." This is what a reporter witnessed lately at Tongguan County, Shanxi Province, where the Wei River flows into the Yellow River. The Yellow River’s largest tributary, the Wei River has lost almost all its useful functions and has instead become a black, stinking "Waste River."

[Xinhuanet, July 8, 2005] In the Gansu Province section of the Yellow River, 65.22 percent of city sewage is directly dispersed into the Yellow River untreated, which has resulted in serious pollution. The issue of preventing and treating the pollution at the Gansu section of the Yellow River has been brought to the attention of the National Political Consultative Conference standing committee.{mospagebreak}

Chinese Communist Government Officials Gamble with Government Money

[The Epoch Times, July 17, 2005] A recent Chinese Communist Party internal communication revealed that Chinese communist government officials use government money for high-stakes gambling at overseas gambling establishments. The communication reports that individuals from mainland China, especially high-ranking government officials at every level, gamble in Las Vegas, and pointed out that, "Regardless of how conservative the estimate is, Chinese gamblers throw away no less than one billion U.S. dollars in Las Vegas every year."

Four Thousand Corrupt Chinese Officials Flee with US$50 Billion

[Central News Agency, August 7, 2005] According to an official Chinese government investigation report, since the reform and open policy, about 40,000 corrupted officials have fled China with an estimated US$50 billion of stolen money.

China Raises Limit on Carrying Foreign Currency Abroad

[, August 3, 2005] The State Administration of Foreign Exchange has raised the limit on foreign currency obtainable through foreign exchange for citizens leaving the country on personal business. Those staying abroad for less than six months can now exchange up to US$5,000 before leaving the country, instead of the previous limit of US$3,000.

More Than 10,000 Farmers in Zhejiang Province Protest Against Local Factory’s Environmental Pollution

[Voice of America, July 19, 2005] The farmers in Xinchang County, Zhejiang Province held a protest against a local pharmaceutical factory, Jingxin Pharmaceutical, because of its serious environmental pollution, and fought with the police. Now this pharmaceutical factory has suspended its production. Jingxin Pharmaceutical was established in 1990, and is a key high-tech enterprise.

200,000 People Die of Adverse Drug Reactions Each Year in China

[Central News Agency, August 1, 2005] Of the 50 million people hospitalized every year, 2.5 million are related to the improper use of drug therapy (including self-medication, obtaining drugs without prescriptions, counterfeit drugs, etc.). Adverse drug reaction causes nealy 200,000 deaths each year. According to Du Wenmin, the deputy director of the Shanghai Adverse Drug Reaction Monitoring Center, people who use drug therapy improperly account for 11 to 26 percent of the total drug consumers in China.{mospagebreak}

Shenzhen’s Population Exceeds 10 Million, Approaches Limit

[Central News Agency, July 31, 2005] By the end of June 2005, Shenzhen City’s actual population reached 10.35 million, although only 1.71 million have been officially registered as residents. It is the only mainland Chinese city with such a large gap between the registered population and non-registered population. The Shenzhen City Police Department’s newly published data shows that Shenzhen City’s population is approaching the city’s limit. If the population inflation cannot be effectively controlled, the environmental capacity of resources such as land, energy, and water will be very difficult to sustain.

2,672 People Died in Coal Mining Accidents in the First Half of 2005

[The Epoch Times, July 17, 2005] In the first half of 2005, there have been 2,672 deaths in China due to coal mining accidents, according to Chinese media reports on July 16, 2005. Official data shows that more than 5,000 people died in coal mining accidents last year. But according to independent observers, the real death toll is more likely approaching 20,000. In order to keep their coal mines from being shut down or fined, some coal mine authorities are deliberately falsifying death tolls.

Prime Minister Wen Jiabao’s plan of "reorganizing coal mines" in view of the frequent accidents and deaths has never truly been carried out due to pressure from tight electricity supplies as well as recently increasing oil prices.

Gas Shortage in Guangzhou City

[Central News Agency, August 13, 2005] As the oil prices around the globe skyrocket, Guangzhou has witnessed its first gasoline shortage in decades, which has affected normal social life in Guangzhou. In recent days, hunting for gasoline has become very common among drivers in Guangzhou. Many gas stations in Guangzhou are posting signs "out of gas" or "short of gas," signs, while there are often long lines at stations that do have gas. Some drivers say that they don’t care about picking the type of gasoline, as they would be content with being able to fill up their gas tanks during the gas shortage. Guangdong Province consumes 40,000-50,000 metric tons of gasoline every day, while daily consumption in Guangzhou alone reaches nearly 10,000 metric tons.

Infected Pork Seized in Sichuan Province

[Xinhuanet, August 10, 2005] Since the outbreak of streptococcus suis in pigs in Sichuan Province, Sichuan’s Department of Industry and Commerce formed an emergency response center to handle the crisis in an attempt to prevent the meat or meat products of dead pigs from circulating in the market. According to this report, 29,000 kilograms (approximately 64,000 lbs.) of pork from infected pigs were seized. According to statistics, 214 people have been infected with the disease, and 39 of them have died of the outbreak. Many local departments have begun investigating local officials for failing to fulfill their duties. At present, 17 officials have been punished.{mospagebreak}

New Wave of Competition Among China’s Youth for Hong Kong’s Colleges

[Central News Agency, August 10, 2005] Eight of Hong Kong’s colleges will accept over 1,000 students this year from mainland China by expanding their acceptance coverage to 17 provinces in China, a fact that has helped create a new wave of applications for Hong Kong’s colleges. While the University of Hong Kong plans to accept 250 undergraduates, nearly 5,000 students have applied-twice the number from last year, and pushing the acceptance ratio to as high as 20 to one. The number of applicants in China for other Hong Kong colleges, including the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hong Kong Baptist University, and Lingnan University, has also doubled this year.

China’s National Security Bureau Rejects Imprisoned Reporter’s Attempt to Hire Lawyer

[Central News Agency, August 25, 2005] Mary Lau, wife of Ching Cheong, a Hong Kong-based top China correspondent for Singapore’s The Straits Times, said yesterday that she had received a written notice from officials of China’s National Security Bureau, denying the family’s application to hire a lawyer for Ching. According to the notice, the application was rejected because Ching was still under investigation for allegedly taking money from and spying for Taiwan.

In a report from Xin Bao, Lau was quoted as saying that the authorities at the National Security Bureau denied the application based on Article 96 in the Criminal Procedure Law of the People’s Republic of China. Article 96 states that Ching Leong has the right, while detained, to hire a lawyer to defend him, file a complaint, or obtain a guarantor pending trial, but such an application must be approved by the investigating authorities.

One Seventh of Shanxi Province’s Land Left Hanging After Aggressive Coal Mining

[Nanfang Daily, August 28, 2005] As much as 20,000 square kilometers (over 7,700 square miles) of land in Shanxi Province is devoted to mining. Given Shanxi’s total land area of 156,000 square kilometers (over 60,000 square miles), almost one-seventh of Shanxi’s land has been affected by the mines. The resulting land subsidence has cost 2.6 billion yuan (US$321 million) in the past ten years alone.

A study by the Shanxi Ministry of Land and Resources indicates that 6,000 square kilometers (over 2,300 square miles) of Shangxi’s mined land are undergoing geological disasters. There have been 1,842 cases of land subsidence because of coal mining, with 47,000 hectares of land damaged, including 18,000 hectares of farmlands. In particular, in New Road Village of Wanbolin District, Taiyuan City, there are many cracks dozens of centimeters wide in the walls of villagers’ homes. The sinking ground has made many buildings tilt, while some of them have already collapsed.{mospagebreak}

Appealers Outraged at False State-Run Media Reports

[The Epoch Times, August 21, 2005] Recently, newspapers such as the Beijing Daily, Beijing Evening, Jinhua Times, and New Beijing, have followed official state-run media in reporting that, for the people who go to Beijing to appeal, 94 percent of their issues are resolved in Beijing. CCTV also broadcasted scenes where the Director of the Beijing Police Department personally interviewed appealers.

People who have been appealing to the government for extended periods of time were outraged at these false reports: "We, hundreds of people appealing day and night, have never seen even the shadow of the director. Where did they get that video? We have only been received by low-level office assistants. Aren’t they falsifying the news?"

On Germany’s General Election

[Editor’s note: China pays close attention to the general election in Germany. The article below is an analysis of what the result of the German presidential election may mean to China. The article was first published in China’s state-run media China Youth Daily and republished in on September 29, 2005.]

It Is Not Good News to China If the Age of Schroeder Is Over

"Please hurry to find a solution!" The chaos after German election on September 18 made Mr. Barroso, President of the E.U. Commission, anxious. The headquarters of the European Union was expecting the deadlock between two German major political parties to end soon. It was because the German election not only has a huge impact on Germany itself, but also affects European Union’s nerves.

On September 28, two major German parties held a second round of negotiation. Various signs have indicated that, after a deadlock for ten days, to form a "grand coalition government" by Christian Democrats/Christian Social Union (CDU/CSU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD) would be more practical and popular. However, the two parties have not reached a clear compromise.

Outsiders need not to worry about complicated election and political struggles in Germany. Nonetheless, one has to pay attention to the impact of German election both on Germany and on other major powers in the world.

Which Direction Is European Political Situation Turning To?

As early as in May/June this year, referendums on "The treaty of European Constitution" held in France and Netherlands have failed one after another. After the July bombing in London, some politicians and analysts around the world believed that, having experienced these events, European countries will make a "right" turn in the future elections.

Germany is one of the largest member states of the European Union and it is also one of the "twin engines" for this giant ship of European Union. Not only has the German election served as a "wind cone" for the European politics but also has had a solid influence on the European political direction.

Prior to the election, CDU/CSU led the poll by 20 percent. It was believed in a lot of analyses and comments that right-wing Merkel would be the new Chancellor of Germany and the political trend in Germany would lead European politics to turn "right" altogether. However, the result of the election indicated that the left-wing has unexpectedly gained support from a large number of people. It was too early to have a "right-turn" conclusion. Even though two parties would reach a compromise that Merkel would take the position as Chancellor for the "grand coalition government," SPD would not easily give up its power in the coalition government. Merkel will not be able to follow her own agenda during her administration.
The Guardian in the United Kingdom even believed that the European political trend is not turning "right" but "left." It reported that the German election has caused a strong reaction in France. The popularity of French right-wing political star Sarkozy faded. The right-wing government in Norway stepped down after a recent election. The British conservative party is unable to recover after a decline. Italian right wing and pro-U.S. government continues to lose people’s support and faces a risk of failure in the next year election. "In fact, the European political trend is not unclear."

European Union’s Foreign Policy Faces an Adjustment

Over the past several years, Germany led by Schroeder, and France led by Chirac, have been European Union’s "motors" and they are also two advocates for European Union’s independence in foreign relations and defense. It may be said that these two "brothers" have caused the United States endless headaches when dealing with Europe.

Schroeder and Chirac ganged up on Bush on the 2003 Iraq war, causing relations between Europe and the United States to slide to a new low since the end of the World War II. After Bush was re-elected, although both the United States and Europe have expressed their "good will" of "reconciliation," and Bush has had several meeting with Schroeder and Chirac to reconcile, the United States has taken a firm stance. Bush would oppose anything that is advantageous to Schroeder and Chirac. A good example is the United States’ stance against Germany to be "a permanent member the Security Council" in the reform of U.N. Security Council.

But after the German election, no matter who takes Chancellor’s office, the hard-line policy adopted in the age of Schroeder toward the United States would be gone forever. Whether in Germany or other European countries, it is believed that in the "post-Schroeder age" it is very important for Germany to fix its relations with the United States. Germany should show a positive attitude (advantageous to the United States) on the Iraq issue. Germany’s attitude on other issues, such as the nuclear problem in Iran, Syria and so on, would be more "flexible."

Since there is little hope for French President Chirac to be re-elected, the European Union, led by Germany, France and the United Kingdom, would be more cooperative with the United States in military and political integration.
China-E.U. Relationship Would Enter a Phase of Adjustment

In recent years, China-E.U. relations have been heated up rapidly. Both sides established a strategic partnership and published "policy documents" toward each other. On the one hand, it is a natural result of the peaceful rising of China and the change of international environment. On the other hand, the friendly attitude toward China by Schroeder and Chirac is also a very important factor.

In the past two years, almost all of motions proposed to strengthen relations between the European Union and China have been strongly supported by France and Germany. On the issue of arms embargo against China, Schroeder and Chirac are part of the determined group to lift the ban.

From the perspective of realistic interests of both sides, it is a main trend that China and the European Union will continue to maintain close relationship. However, on some important issues that would bother China-E.U. relations, such as the arms embargo against China and the "position in the market economy," Merkel and next French President will not be as positive as in the age of Schroeder and Chirac. China-E.U. relations might enter a new phase of adjustment. Germany will take turn to be the Chairman State of the E.U. Commission in the first half of 2007. Then, we will see how Germany will further develop relations between China and the European Union.

Free High Quality Images Download Free Stock Images Download Free Images Free Stock Photos & Images Beautiful Free Stock Photos (CC0) Free stock photos