Skip to content

How Much Did Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, and Jiang Zemin Get Paid for Their Publications?

Officially, the People’s Republic of China is an atheist country. From a different perspective, however, it appears to be a country where religion and government are one. China’s leaders are not only political leaders; they are also spiritual leaders. In Christianity, the supreme authority is God. In Islam, the top authority is Allah. In the Chinese government, the highest authorities are Mao Zedong, Deng Xiaoping, and Jiang Zemin. The Christians have the Bible, the Muslims have the Koran, but in China, Chairman Mao’s Quotations, Selected Works of Mao Zedong, Selected Articles of Deng Xiaoping, and various publications of Jiang Zemin’s speeches have attained the status of China’s "Bible." There is a difference, though: the Bible and the Koran are like Lunyu (Confucius’ teachings). No matter how many copies were published, Jesus, Mohammed and Confucius never made a penny from their books. Yet Mao, Deng and Jiang made a fortune from all of the publications that bear their names. And the Chinese government has paid for the bills.

According to independent research, during the ten years of the Cultural Revolution (1966-1976), China published 870 editions of Selected Works of Mao Zedong (Volume 1-4). The total published was 325 million paperbacks and 2.55 million hard covers. China also published the same book in 14 foreign different languages, including English and French for a total volume of 1.22 million. Over 500 million copies of another book, Selected Articles of Mao Zedong, were printed, for a total volume of 252.5 million. In addition, China also published many single-article books from Mao Zedong. There are over 6,000 editions. The total volume reached the astronomical figure of 2.886 billion!

The largest number of volumes so far is Chairman Mao’s Quotations. In the second half of 1966, in China, 200 to 300 printing factories printed this book. Most provinces printed enough books for the entire population, one per person. In October 1966, the Central Propaganda Ministry approved the export of Chairman Mao’s Quotations. By May of 1967, in only eight months, China International Book Trading Corporation exported over 800,000 copies to 117 countries and regions in 14 languages. Some researchers calculated that during the Cultural Revolution, the total volume of Chairman Mao’s Quotations published in China and abroad was over 5 billion. There are 500 editions in over 50 languages. The book was arguably the world’s "most popular book in the 20th century."

As for Deng Xiaoping’s books, according to the data in 1993, up until the end of 1992, China had published 56 of Deng’s works, totaling over 100 million copies. For Jiang Zemin, according to research, his book On the Three Representations "sold" more than 100 million copies. Each member of the 68 million Communist Party members has at least one copy. All the government employees, including teachers and doctors also have the book. There is no accurate number to indicate exactly how many books he had published during his 13 years in power.
Such an astronomical number of copies represents a huge profit. According to reliable statistics, by the end of May 2001, Mao Zedong’s work had generated 131 million yuan (US$16 million). Deng Xiaoping’s publication Selected Articles of Deng Xiaoping (Volume 1,2,3) in 1993 had a price tag of 35.4 yuan (US$4.4). Assuming the remuneration was 15 percent and the volume was 50 million (each Party member has one), the one-time income was 265 million yuan (US$33 million). Also an independent researcher estimated that Jiang Zemin made a huge profit. His book On the Three Representations sells at 12 yuan per copy. With 80 million copies, at 15 percent of payment, his estimated profit is 144 million yuan (US$18 million). We should point out that it is primarily the government that buys Deng’s and Jiang’s books.

Consider the following. Mao met with President Nixon, Deng met with Prime Minister Thatcher, and Jiang Zemin met with President Clinton. They are all country leaders. But has the U.S. government ever published any of Nixon’s quotations? Has the U.K. government ever published any of Mrs. Thatcher’s works? Has the U.S. government ever published any of Clinton’s articles? How much profit did Nixon, Thatcher, and Clinton make from government spending on their books? China’s social system is so-called Socialism, but with a Chinese flavor. It has a strong Chinese flavor indeed.


Jiao Guobiao was an associate professor of journalism in Beijing University. His article "Declaration of the Campaign against The Central Propaganda Department" criticizes that the Central Propaganda Department is the largest and most powerful protective umbrella for the forces of evil and corruption in China. The article was well-liked by Chinese people but angered the authorities. He was later dismissed from his post by the university.

Why Is China So Interested in Offshore Mergers and Acquisitions?

Since March of 2005, the Chinese government has been proudly announcing that Chinese companies’ overseas mergers and acquisitions (M&As) have surged by 70 percent and that it anticipates the offshore M&As will be US$14 billion in 2005. It further predicts that China will become the most active country in the Asian Pacific region in terms of offshore M&As.

Nevertheless, China’s surge in offshore M&A activities faces two major problems.

Economic Issues with M&As

The first problem is economic. While China is celebrating its successful M&As, some of its buyers are experiencing significant losses. In 2004, TCL went through major restructuring after it acquired Thomson Color TV and Alta Cellular. While TCL’s size expanded rapidly, its revenue did not increase accordingly. The annual financial report showed the 2004 net income of TCL Group to be 245 million yuan (US$30 million), a drastic drop from the 570 million yuan (US$69.5 million) in the prior year. The profitability outlook for Lenovo Group, the biggest PC manufacturer in China, was very unclear after it acquired the PC division of IBM. As a matter of fact, Chinese companies are lacking adequate preparation for managing and counter measures for handling the risks involved in offshore M&As.

Political Problems with M&As

The second problem is political. Around July 21, the Chinese government announced its strategic change in its Renminbi exchange rate system. At the time, a few of its domestic companies were experiencing frustration in their attempts to make overseas acquisitions. The board of Unocal Corp. voted in favor of the lower Chevron offer of US$17.3 billion in both cash and stocks. The board announced that they wanted to "urge the shareholders to vote for the Chevron offer at the August 10 shareholder meeting." The positive progress of the Chevron offer indicated that CNOOC, the Chinese bidder, was actually out of the game. Almost at the same time, the Haier Group, another large Chinese corporation, announced that it gave up its plan to purchase Maytag Corp., its U.S. counterpart.

The obstacles that China’s CNOOC encountered in its Unocal acquisition originated from the M&A strategies of China’s corporations. While in general, the company being acquired is interested mainly in the sale price, the government of the country of the company being acquired pays more attention to issues of economic security. Since 2002, six Chinese firms have become the key players in offshore M&As. The motivation behind the Chinese companies’ offshore M&A activities can be categorized as follows.
China’s Motivation for M&As

1. Guided by China’s national resource strategy, the first kind of offshore M&A targets companies abroad with irreplaceable natural resources. China Minmetals Corporation’s attempt to merge with Canada’s Noranda is one such example.

2. The second kind of offshore M&A aims at gaining key technologies that China’s corporations lack. Shanghai Automotive Industry Corporation’s acquisition of Korea’s Sang Yong Motor Co. and England’s MG Rover falls into this category.

3. The last category of offshore M&A aims at acquiring international brand names and sales networks in order to improve the image of Chinese companies in the global markets. Examples are the aforementioned overseas activities by China’s Haier, Lenovo, and TCL.

These three motivations behind China’s offshore M&As make strategic sense to China’s interests and will continue to be the fundamental consideration of China’s corporations in their future offshore M&A activities.

On the other hand, the above three strategic considerations do not necessarily match the national interests of the country of the acquired companies. Generally speaking, the third strategic consideration to acquire brand names and sales channels does not conflict with the economic security of the home nations. Yet the first kind of M&A, because it involves scarce resources, obviously affects the resource security of the targeted country. With regard to the second category, M&A by a foreign company does not pose much of a threat if only civil technologies are involved, while it will certainly face numerous obstacles if military technologies are involved.

Recently the Chinese Academy of International Trade and Economic Cooperation (CAITEC), under the Ministry of Commerce, published a study of China’s corporations’ foreign direct investment. The report indicates that in the past few years, among various types of foreign direct investments (FDI) by China’s corporations, the offshore M&A and the swapping of stock ownership have been increasing. Thus strategic investments abroad are gradually becoming a new way for China’s corporations to grow on the international stage.

Through discussions and surveys, CAITEC studied various corporations in 13 provinces. The feedback showed that with China’s surging foreign exchange reserves and the adjustment of Chinese corporations’ foreign investment strategies, that "M&As of overseas local companies" are becoming one of the major types of FDI by China’s corporations. Among various investment types, offshore M&As jumped to 34.4 percent, under the 69.8 percent of "setting up non-manufacturing branches such as offices and agencies," the 49 percent of "forming new joint ventures," and the 46.9 percent of "incorporating new companies." As is shown in the following table, the capital used for offshore M&As has been surging since 2003.
The Surge of Offshore M&A Capital by Chinese Companies

Chinese Companies’ M&A Activities

Summary of Profit and Loss Staement for SOEs (in billions)

Year M&A Capital(in US$ billion) % Increase of M&As China’s Foreign Exchange Reserve (in US$ billion)
 2003  2085    403.25
 2004  7  50%  609.93
 2005  14  100%  711.00 (until June)
(Data source from Credit Lyonnais Securitie and from the published reports by the National Bureau of Statistics of China)

According to various sources, China’s offshore M&As are spared no cost. As soon as an interesting target is found, they are anxious to acquire it at any cost. As a result, they tend to overspend on M&As. While such behavior is ridiculed in China’s business circles as the "teenage phenomenon" and is considered economically immature, nothing can stop the acceleration of China’s overseas M&A activities. The total capital involved in the Lenovo acquisition of IBM’s PC division, the Haier deal, and the attempted Unocal acquisition by CNOOC, reached US$21.5 billion, which, according to some calculations, is equivalent to China’s profit from selling 100 million PCs, 100 million refrigerators or air conditioners, and 100 million clothing articles together with 100 million pairs of shoes. To these Chinese companies, such an astronomical amount is apparently beyond their financial reach. Who, then, is pushing China’s M&A activities overseas?

Why is the Chinese Government Pushing for More M&As?

The Chinese government is certainly behind these daring moves and has two considerations in pushing Chinese companies’ offshore M&A activities forward.

First, China’s economic growth shows signs of trouble. Because of the white-hot market competition, China’s businesses are facing tremendous challenges. For example, the net profit of Haier in 2004 approximated that of 2003, while its gross profit margin in the refrigerator business declined from 19.2 percent in 2003 to 16.5 percent in 2004. In the fourth quarter of 2004 before Lenovo’s purchase of IBM’s PC division, Lenovo’s net profit margin dropped 12 percent from the same period in 2003. It is natural that these companies try to lower cost and gain higher profit by expanding production—a phenomenon resembling Japanese businesses in the late 1980s when they chose to invest in foreign markets.
China’s economic growth is currently facing a risk of slowdown. In May of 2005, foreign direct investments in China decreased 0.8 percent as compared with the same period of 2004. This was the first time since September 2000 that FDI in China shrank. This probably indicates significant changes in the foreign investors’ outlook on China’s economic prospects.

The second consideration by the Chinese government in supporting overseas M&As is the deterioration of the terms of foreign exchange reserves in China due to the "double surplus" in trade and capital. It is shown that as of the first half of this year, China’s total foreign exchange reserve reached as high as US$711 billion, a surge of 51.1 percent from the same period last year. Such a large reserve certainly results in a serious imbalance between supply and demand. The annual rate of return from China’s foreign reserve is calculated to be -5 percent.

There are several ways to alleviate this problem:

1. Spend the U.S. dollars that flow in from overseas

2. Lower the domestic demand

3. Adjust the exchange rate

Currently the Chinese government is employing both the first and the second approaches to release the pressure from the deterioration of the foreign currency reserve situation. To the Chinese government, it is a reasonable choice to spend U.S. dollars overseas by investing abroad and carrying out M&A overseas.

As a result, the Chinese government has been taking various measures to encourage its domestic enterprises to "go abroad." The special "2005 World Forum of ‘Going Abroad’ for Chinese Companies" held by CAITEC showed that the government will provide policy and fiscal support to Chinese companies. With such "fiscal support," who can blame U.S. Congress for questioning the (Chinese) government backing behind Chinese companies’ M&As in the United States.

He Qinglian is a renowned economist and jornalist from China. She is currently staying in the United States as a guest researcher.

The Battle Between the Chinese Government and Falun Gong An internal speech by the Chinese Deputy

[Editor’s note: Liu Jing, Deputy Minister of the Chinese Public Security Ministry, delivered a speech at a high-ranking Chinese Communist Party (CCP) meeting on June 30, 2005, about the battle between the Chinese government and Falun Gong. Liu Jing is also a member of the CCP Central Committee and Director of the Central Anti-Cult Office (initially named as the "610 Office" or "Office for Handling Falun Gong Issues").

Falun Gong is a kind of qigong practice, which became popular in China after it was introduced to the public in 1992. The principle of the practice"truthfulness, compassion, and forbearance"shares the core values of traditional Chinese culture and is therefore easily accepted by Chinese people. But the popularity of Falun Gong concerned the then Communist Party Chief Jiang Zemin. Jiang didn’t take well to the fact that so many people were out of his control and ordered to ban the practice in China on July 20, 1999. In order to justify the crackdown, Jiang personally claimed that Falun Gong was an evil cult when he was visiting France in October 1999. Despite the ruthless persecution over the past six years by the CCP, Falun Gong has never succumbed to the suppression and has persistently appealed to the government and the public to stop the persecution all over the world, a movement they call "clarifying the truth."

Below is a transcript of Liu Jing’s speech that describes how the CCP views the situation in regard to its battle against Falun Gong. In Liu’s speech, the CCP attributes its inability to eradicate Falun Gong to the support and financial aid by a Western anti-China force led by the United States.

In all subsequent instances, "anti-cult" is used in place of "anti-evil cult," and "cult" is used in place of "evil cult." Liu Jing used the word "evil" in front of each occurrence of "cult."

"Struggle" and "battle" are used interchangeably in English. In Chinese, it’s the same word.

The transcript is based on a voice recording and has not been reviewed by the author.

The speech contains vilifying statements toward the CCP’s perceived enemies, and one may need to construe those statements with caution. More information about the battle between the Chinese government and Falun Gong can also be found in the July issue of Chinascope:"Falun Gong: 1992 – 2005."]

I am reporting to comrades the situation of our struggle against Falun Gong. ….As internal information is involved, I request that comrades keep it secret, as the struggle is quite serious.
Our struggle against the Falun Gong cult organization has spanned over six years. On April 25, six years ago, tens of thousands of people suddenly surrounded Zhongnanhai Compound without any prior indication, it was well-organized with strict enforcement of orders and prohibitions. They appeared suddenly, and left very suddenly. Hence started our battle with the Falun Gong organization. In the past six years, under the correct leadership of the CCP Central Committee, and supported by various departments and organizations, we have attained significant victories, and have taken control of this battle inside the country, but due to the complicated influence of numerous factors, both internationally and domestically, the battle is still very severe and complicated, especially after last November [in 2004]. The Falun Gong overseas headquarters has joined hands with other enemy forces and Taiwan independence forces, and dished out the series of reactionary articlesNine Commentaries on the Communist Party, which further complicated the situation.

Speaking of the current situation of the battle, we have to consider the current international backdrop at large. We have found, in our work, that two problems of great importance are worthy of our special attention.

The first one is, after the success of its anti-terrorism strategy, the United States is further pursuing its global hegemony. It has clearly strengthened its restraining tendency toward China, bringing increased external pressure on our safety and our political and social stability. As a pawn in the hands of Western anti-China forcesheaded by the United Statesthe reactionary role played by Falun Gong has been noted more obviously. In other words, the United States is now in a better position, and their hands are not as full as before the success of the anti-terrorism strategy. We all know that Western enemy forces have never given up their strategic scheme to westernize and/or split-off [Translator’s note: Chinese word leans toward the division of people, rather than land] our country’s population. The United States has never changed its fundamental policy of restraining the development of China. With the increasing strengthening of China’s overall national power, the United States has become increasingly worried about China’s rise. It regards China more and more as a potential opponent, or a potential enemy. Prior to 9/11, when [George W.] Bush took the office of presidency for the first term, he characterized the Sino-U.S. relationship as "strategic opponents," and adopted very apparent hostile policies toward us. After the war on terrorism started on 9/11, out of its anti-terrorism need, the United States expanded its cooperation with us. Bush changed his term to "constructive cooperation" for characterizing the Sino-U.S. relationship. Even so, he has never changed his dual approach to his policy of contact and constraint. During this period, under the excuse of anti-terrorism, the United States took the opportunity to accelerate its military besiege surrounding [China]. At present, after its success in Afghanistan and Iraq, the United States has expanded its influence of reach and its hegemonic ambition has become further inflated. In Bush’s second term, he changed his global strategy from anti-terrorism to "ending tyranny." Recently, Bush used "comprehensive and complicated" to characterize the Sino-U.S. relationship, which has gone backwards from "constructive cooperation" to "comprehensive and complicated." [Translator’s note: This exact term has been used by Colin Powell. See news title at] It is rather apparent that the policy of restraining China has been pushed to the forefront, and a series of actions have been taken to restrain [China].
Through this brief review, it’s not hard to see that there has been a consistent guideline behind these actions. In February this year [2005], Japan and the United States confirmed that Taiwan was a beneficiary [Translator’s note: English literature used the word "common concern" to describe the Taiwan straight in light of the treaty; see:] under the U.S.-Japan Security Treaty. Meanwhile, the United States pressured the revaluation of the [Chinese] Renminbi [yuan], and set quotas on textile exports from China. It has increasingly blamed [China] for problems regarding intellectual property. From the end of last year [2004] to the beginning of this year, the United States resorted to all kinds of approaches and did everything it could think of to prevent the E.U. from lifting its ban on weapons sales to China. Recently, the rhetoric of "China threat" has caused a temporary clamor in the United States. The Pentagon is planning on publishing its evaluation report on China’s military power. Their VIPs have also been busy at spreading the words of "China threat," antagonizing the relationship between China and other Asian-Pacific nations. This has indicated that the Sino-U.S. relationship has entered a bumpy period, or a period of numerous problems.

Why do I want to review these things? We can recall that around November of last year [2004], it was then that Falun Gong brought out the series of the Nine Commentaries. It seemed to be accidental. In fact, it was an echo, and it was an act that was echoing to end this kind of rule and this kind of regime. In the U.S. strategy of restraining China, the Taiwan issue is an important chip, and Falun Gong is a pawn for sabotaging national security and political stability. The Western anti-China forces, headed by the United States, have determined that Falun Gong is a "resistance force" in China, and it is an organization that could possibly cause turmoil in China. The disruptive and sabotaging activities of Falun Gong, in fact, are a strategic component of the Western anti-China forces in their carrying out the scheme of westernizing and splitting off China. Some comrades have often asked me why the Falun Gong issue has not been resolved. I can surely say, without the U.S. support, this issue would have long been resolved. There were about two million people who practiced, not the 70 million they claimed. After these few years of hard and painstaking work, only about 40,000 people remain with problems that we have not fully resolved. That is to say that domestically, the political and social foundation of Falun Gong has been significantly weakened. Then why do we say that this problem is not resolved? Because the role of its being a pawn remains [to be played out], because there’s U.S. support, and it continues to be rather influential overseas, and remains to be the so-called "resistance force" to be used by Americans. It’s exactly because of U.S. support, which has increased the complexity and difficulty in our battle with Falun Gong. This is an issue, and as a pawn, its reactionary role is particularly outstanding.

First, from the perspective of the dramatic changes of the former Soviet Union and eastern European countries, to the "color revolutions" in Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan, [Translator’s note: see rose revolution in Georgia, orange revolution in Ukraine, and tulip revolution at Kyrgyzstan at], the "velvet" action brought up by Falun Gong should raise heightened alert among us. After dishing out the Nine Commentaries, in March, they brought up the "velvet" action, which is completely equivalent to "color revolution." In order to explain this issue, I think we should analyze the situations of these countries where "color revolution" took place. I think the following are some key factors of the "color revolutions":
1. Opposing political factions had formed, and they played the backbone and leadership role in "color revolution." [Lech] Walesa in Poland and [Vaclav] Havel in Czech in the past, and present day’s [Viktor] Yushchenko in Ukraine, those in Kyrgyzstan, etc., all played such a role.

2. Media propaganda promoted the views of opposing political factions, attacking the current regime’s dictatorship, and corruption, which laid the legal foundation and prepared in media the taking over by the opposing factions.

3. Intervention by foreign forces, which brought about the situation of coordinated internal and external actions. From the situations of the "color revolution" in these countries, the necessary external condition for "color revolutions" to succeed was the all-out support from Western countries. These countries, through non-governmental organizations in particular, infiltrated ideologically into countries where "color revolution" took place, providing funding and technical guidance, and training key members of "street politics." On the one hand, it offered support via APO [Translator’s note: might stand for Administrative Protective Order], meanwhile the governments resorted to diplomatic pressure, economic sanctions, and other measures. These external factors caused the taking over of power in these "color revolution" countries through street politics.

4. There had to be timing, opportunity, and taking advantage of some accidental incidents, such as election, ballot, or a timing as such, when those in power were being forced to step down via street politics. What I call accidental events was, in fact, inevitable. It was simply an opening they had chosen for breakthrough. In going over the situations in this period, pushing forward a "color revolution," through street politics, to change the country’s polity for regime change, has become an important measure by the United States to topple other countries’ regimes. In regards to this, we have to take warning and attach importance to it.

We must stay alert and keep up strict guard against the "velvet" action brought up by Falun Gong. At the beginning of this year, a document forwarded by the Office of the CCP Central Committee pointed out that Falun Gong had totally exposed its anti-China, anti-CCP true nature, and had become a reactionary political organization funded and supported by the United States and the Taiwan independent forces, engaging in cult activities, with the goal of overthrowing the CCP. We can analyze Falun Gong activities based on the four elements of "color revolution." One, Falun Gong has turned into a political opposing faction from a cult organization, becoming the key player among various reactionary forces domestically and overseas.
In November of last year, Li Hongzhi and Falun Gong headquarters, through secret planning with Taiwan independence activists and pro-democracy movement activists, dished out the series of the Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party, challenging the legality of the rule of our Party, challenging the legality of our Party’s leading Chinese revolution and construction, and challenging us in political and ideological fields. They openly shouted in the Nine Commentaries, "Only when there is no CCP, can China be saved." As thus indicated, Falun Gong stripped off their many years of boasted camouflage of not opposing the government, not engaging in politics, openly unfurling their anti-China, anti-CCP banner. In March of this year, they brought up China’s "velvet" action plan, established an action committee, declared the establishment of a transitory government and [nomination of] a "president pro tempore" overseas, and on this basis were to push for a nationwide election to generate a "legal government" in order to force the CCP to give up power. This development had taken a long time.

In October 2003, Falun Gong again adjusted their struggle strategy from bringing up troubles by themselves to helping others to bring up troubles, and then form the configuration that both were involved in bringing up troubles. They planned together on June 4th and other events. Falun Gong was the main force in Hong Kong’s July 1 grand parade in 2003. They have accelerated their cooperation with other forces, held over 70 Nine Commentaries forums in more than 30 countries and regions, and reached a consensus that "the CCP is our one and only enemy." Starting in January 2005, they initiated, in coordination with over 60 groups and organizations, the campaign of withdrawing from the CCP. Presently, with the common goal to overthrow the CCP, they have unified political stands, have taken the approach of joint resistance and coordinated work, have unified an organizational foundation, adopted the primary measure of engaging in street politics to seize power, unified their trouble-making strategy, and have established, preliminarily, an anti-China, anti-CCP federation. Just last month, they established the "Global Service Center for Quitting the CCP," and named July 1 as "the Day of All People Quitting the CCP" and July as "the Month of All People Quitting the CCP," in order to bring about a new wave of anti-CCP.

Among this anti-China, anti-CCP federation, Falun Gong is the core force and has established its bellwether position in trouble-making as a result of its strict organizational system, full-fledged propaganda machine, and abundant financial resources. After over a dozen years of painstaking buildup, Falun Gong has established organizations in more than 50 foreign countries and regions, and their activities have spread over to 70 countries and regions in each continent worldwide. There are over 50,000 people who frequently participated in trouble-making. There are more people overseas than in China. Key members total about 5,000. They have formed a multifunctional organization system, where orders are carried out smoothly. This includes the headquarters, regional coordination organizations, propaganda organizations, special trouble-making activity organizations, such as telephone activities team, educational and training organization, and peripheral supporting systems. Especially worth noting is that, after consolidation, The Epoch Times newspaper, almost matches our Guangming Daily in terms of weekly circulation. It is so-called "delivered" free. This paper has journalist stations in over 40 countries.
"New Tang Dynasty TV" (NTDTV) rented four satellites broadcasting around the globe. Its coverage is very extensive among Chinese stations. The transmitters they rent from satellite companies are normally more than double the price of commercial use. Even the satellite companies say that this NTDTV is deep-pocketed. Normally renting of one transmitter costs US$500,000 to US$1 million, but they offer to pay US$2 million to start with. When Eutelsat tried to terminate their relationship with NTDTV, more than 40 U.S. congresspersons applied pressure, and a representative from the U.S. military applied pressure directly on the owner of Eutelsat. The representative made it clear that if the contract with NTDTV were cancelled, the U.S. military would cancel its contracts with Eutelsat worth over US$ 40 million.

Then there is the "Sound of Hope Radio Station." We all remember that there was a "Sound of Freedom Radio Station" around June 4, [1989], which only existed a brief few days. But "Sound of Hope" is of high capacity, and their headquarters and broadcasting towers are located in Taiwan. Additionally, there is a Broad Press Inc., plus over 200 websites coordinated by Thus forms their commanding, instigating and propaganda spreading network system, which is configured primarily around The Epoch Times, NTDTV, Sound of Hope Radio Station, and Clearwisdom net. Simply from the perspective of propaganda quantity and scale, this system exceeds the size of a regular organization. In some sense, it is equivalent to the configuration of a government’s propaganda system. This propaganda system has served as a platform, directing and coordinating various overseas and enemy forces. The facts have indicated that Falun Gong has become the core, trouble-making center of overseas anti-China and anti-CCP forces. It has become the political opposing faction, and it has become the core of overseas enemy forces.

Second, [it’s about] spreading sweeping reactionary propaganda and engaging in long-term operations and planning. We all remember that Mao Zedong said that to overthrow a power, one must carry out propaganda campaigns first. Revolutionary classes do it like this, and anti-revolutionary classes also do it like this. Falun Gong and its behind-the-scenes organizations know this principle as well. Prior to the publishing of the Nine Commentaries, the reactionary propaganda of Falun Gong concentrated on "persecution" situations. At the beginning of this year, we exposed the photos in the torture case in Huanggang, Hubei Province, as fabricated by Falun Gong. We have educated this person. He, himself, felt that he did something America wanted to do. Those torture photos were [brought out] at a time when international media were condemning the United States for abusing prisoners of [anti-terrorism] war. It brought about serious negative impact on folks who did not know the truth. [Many] condemned our state leaders, and called for sanctions against [China]. Since 1999, Falun Gong has been holding activities at each year’s U.N. Human Rights Conference. In 2001, Falun Gong gathered 1,500 practitioners in Geneva, and made a media splash in coordination with the anti-China resolution introduced by the United States. They even occupied the square in front of the U.N. headquarters for three days. The United States did not introduce anti-China resolutions this year, and about 100 Falun Gong people went there. They were in complete coordination with the United States.Until the end of last year, they were belittling and defaming our image, smearing our Party and country in coordination with [the United States].
After the Nine Commentaries came out, Falun Gong mobilized all of their propaganda machines to spread the Nine Commentaries, to attack our CCP history, and to negate the success since the reform and opening up that has caught the attention of the world. Especially now they have mobilized all the propaganda machines to incite people to do the "three withdraws." That is, to withdraw from the CCP, withdraw from the Youth League, and even from the Young Pioneers. Their purpose is to prepare, media-wise, for the overthrow of the CCP and the socialist system. They resorted to various measures, with no options being ruled out, and especially notable is the deployment of modern technologies.

Falun Gong gathered a group of highly educated, new-generation elite, who mastered modern technology and media methods, and who formed various special technology task forces. From last December to the end of May this year, our relevant departments found a total of 248 websites about the Nine Commentaries, and had blocked 80 million attempted accesses to these sites, and blocked over 30 million e-mails. We must admit that there are weak links in our preventive measures in these technical fields. In other words, the Western [countries] are one step ahead of us in terms of technology measures and information security. For example, it is currently hard to calculate how many harassment calls were made. Based on our preliminary statistics, reports filed [by the authorities] alone amounted to tens of millions. Another example is tapping into satellites. Since June 23, 2002, we have been attacked by Falun Gong illegal signals 186 times, totaling 103 hours 37 minutes. Among these, 51 cases took place this year. On March 14, 17 and the evening of the 21st, six transmitters were attacked in three rounds. Each round lasted one and a half hour, resulting in interference of 18 Chinese Central Television (CCTV) and local channels. The reactionary Nine Commentaries footage appeared on TV for as long as one minute and 12 seconds, resulting in extremely negative influence. Many viewers called, "Why did images of overthrowing the CCP show up on state-run television?" Attacking satellites involves very complicated technology issues, which means that highly capable people are involved in planning and support, which makes it very hard to guard against.

We must understand, this is not only a severe threat to our national security and information security, it has also brought serious challenges to our ideological field. In fact, the Western enemy forces are taking advantage of their superior information technology to start an ideological war without any gunfire. In this regard, Falun Gong has done something the United States and Taiwan dare not to do. This is the second point.

Third, funded and supported by Western anti-China forces and Taiwan independence forces, [Falun Gong] actively acts as a pawn [serving the purpose] of being anti-China, anti-CCP. It is inevitable that Falun Gong has turned reactionary politically as they have been supported by the U.S. and Western anti-China forces. In the mid-90s of the last century, foreign intelligence agencies conducted careful research on Falun Gong, considered it a force that could be used, and suggested the organization to the U.S. government for "temporary exploit." After April 26 [1999], foreign forces increasingly saw the value of making use of Falun Gong, and further strengthened their support.
Taking recent incidents as an example, they had frequent trouble-making activities overseas. The number of attendees easily exceeded 1,000, as they called for global campaigns, and held large-scale evening parties. This indicates that they are very sufficiently funded. As we have seen in some reports, some leading overseas democratic activists expressed their envy of Falun Gong’s source of never-ending funds. Comrades may all ask from whom do they receive the money? You can all make clear judgments, who is supporting them? Who is providing the money? Some comrades went overseas, and saw groups of old people standing by our embassies holding banners, and doing physical movements. After careful inquiry, we found that they mostly are living on social welfare. It’s this group of people, which indicates that [organizers] have lots of money [to hire these old people]!

We must especially point out that the Taiwan independence forces are even more in tune with Falun Gong, and they offer support from all perspectives. We have investigated and found that satellite-attacking equipment is installed in Taiwan. The "Sound of Hope Radio Station" is located in Taipei. The Taiwan independence forces were important in supporting this recent publishing of the Nine Commentaries overseas. The head of Falun Gong in Taiwan, Chang Ching-hsi, a professor at Taiwan National University, sent Nine Commentaries articles to Chen Shui-bian. Chen replied in his letter, praising that "the viewpoints are indeed unique." Chen ordered relevant departments to offer Falun Gong political and financial support. Annette Lu, [Translator’s note: Vice-President of Taiwan, whose name is also spelled as Lu Hsiu-lien] pretended that she had started practicing Falun Gong. Falun Gong has actively helped Taiwan independence forces. On March 26 of this year, the "opposing anti-secession law" parade was said to have over one million participants, but it was actually a parade of only 20,000 or so people. Falun Gong was an important organizer. They organized three tiers, each with 3,000-6,000 people, totaling at least 10,000 participants. They unfurled banners which read "Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party is the Best Remedy to Oppose Anti-Secession Law."

Fourth, conducting an all-out reactionary propaganda campaign targeting inside [China], in an attempt to re-establish teams, to intervene in domestic affairs, and to prepare for "velvet" action. After the publishing of the Nine Commentaries, our overall judgment was that the noise was loud overseas while there was little action domestically. As the infiltration has continued, there has been relatively significant negative impact domestically. The current propaganda calls for Falun Gong [followers] inside China to do "three things" well during the "Fa-rectification." That is to spread the Nine Commentaries, guide people to see clearly the CCP’s true nature, and to spread the three withdraws. On the other hand, they did everything possible to get involved in mass incidents, to try to direct various mass incidents toward the direction of dissatisfaction with the Party and government, and to intertwine Falun Gong activities with people’s demand based on their own interests, and to push forward a "velvet" action.
Recently there have developed two tendencies in domestic Falun Gong activities. One is underground activities have turned apparently political. One province did a survey of 87 Falun Gong people who had exposure to the Nine Commentaries, and found that over 50 percent of them were in agreement of the opinion [of the Nine Commentaries], and only 13 percent opposed it. We have solved anti-CCP cases in Beijing, Tianjin, Liaoning Province, Shanghai, Henan Province, Jinan City [in Shandong Province], Heilongjiang Province, Hubei Province, Guangdong Province, and Chongqing. One employee of a water resources bureau openly persuaded people to quit the CCP on the bus and inside the bureau’s family quarters. May 13 [2005] was World Falun Gong Dafa Day, which was Li Hongzhi’s birthday. There appeared a huge 13 meter by 1.5 meter [43 feet by 5 feet] banner in the downtown of a province capital city, which read, "Stop the Persecution; Say Farewell to the CCP." Just last month, one teacher openly told her elementary school pupils, "The red ties you wear are soaked with the blood of those killed by the CCP." She tried to stir up emotions among these kids to quit the Young Pioneers. This is a political tendency.

The second tendency is that dissatisfied people in society are gradually gathering under the torn-up banner of Falun Gong. This tendency that develops among domestic liberalization activists and people who are dissatisfied with the Party and the society is worth our special attention.

Recently, Falun Gong has planned the "four withdraws/quits," which are ridiculous and, shameless. First is to withdraw from the stock marketcausing the stock market to collapse. Second is to withdraw money from banks and cause banks to bankrupt, resulting in social chaos. Third is to quit your job and cause "herd behavior," resulting in social turmoil. The fourth is to quit eating, instigating persons in the mainland to declare a group hunger strike, to be followed by overseas persons. If someone dies as a result, then the practitioner will be declared internally to have reached consummation. Publicly, the United States and U.N. will [be urged] to stop the CCP’s brutality.

Hence, comrades should pay serious attention to these two tendencies.

These are the two issues I communicate to comrades which should be worth our special attention. Overall, Falun Gong has become a political opposing faction, the core, key force joined by various overseas enemy forces confronting us. Hence, presently and in a rather lengthy period of time to come, Falun Gong has a realistic damage and threat potential to our national security. The battle with Falun Gong is a matter that is related to the Party’s ruling status, and it is an enduring, political battle that is related to maintaining societal stability.

The Anti-Christ in China

In recent decades, an increasing number of people in the West have been reading and studying the Biblical prophecies from the Book of Revelation, also known as the Apocalypse. Among Chinese people, too, there has emerged a growing interest in studying the Book of Revelation, where the readers perceive parallels between the Chinese Communist Party (CCP)’s policies and practices and the prophecies found in the Christian Bible. For example, more and more Chinese people are calling the Chinese Communist Party "the Red Dragon." Since November or December 2004, many Chinese have renounced their membership in the CCP. When they do so, they often say they are ridding themselves of "the Mark of the Beast." Further, it is particularly interesting to read Chinese articles comparing Beijing to "Babylon the great, the mother of the harlots, and abominations of the earth." (Rev 17:5)

While the Book of Revelation reveals that Man’s ultimate end requires facing the final "Judgment," the particular way in which that will occur is expounded upon by all the great religions in various ways. The Chinese view on this appears largely unknown in the West. This article aims to summarize how some mainland Chinese Christians and Chinese Internet writers interpret the suppression of their faith in the light of terminology expressed in the Book of Revelation from the New Testament. The author is fully aware that other Christians may discern different meanings in this sacred book. This article should not be interpreted as an endorsement by the author of any particular view on this matter.

Intolerance Toward Religion: Communist China’s Policy

The anti-faith, anti-Christian characteristic of the CCP is well known, although the Party has sought to deny it. Its practice of suppressing religions, including the most popular ones in AsiaBuddhism and Taoismcan be traced back to the early 1950s when the Party first took power in China. In recent years, the international media has frequently exposed China’s brutal persecution of 100 million Falun Gong practitioners and its continued suppression of underground Christians, Tibetan Buddhists, and Uighur Muslims. All of the main international human rights groups as well as the U.S. Department of State and the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom (an independent, bipartisan U.S. Government agency that monitors freedom of religion abroad) have documented and condemned such oppression.

The anti-faith, anti-Christian practices of the CCP puts China at odds with most industrialized countries, even though China’s GDP has climbed to the third largest in the world. For example, even though last April almost all the influential political leaders around the world attended the funeral of Pope John Paul II in Rome, no Chinese leader showed up. Considering the fact that both the Israeli and Palestinian prime ministers flew to Rome for the funeral and that even Communist Cuba sent its representative to show respect to the beloved Pope, the absence of a Chinese government representative stood out in stark contrast.
Of course, we should not say that no Chinese officials were in Rome to attend the Pope’s funeral. Chen Shui-bian, the democratically elected President of Taiwan, was there to represent the Republic of China. In an ironic twist, the communist government of mainland China sent a protest to the Vatican regarding President Chen Shui-bian’s presence at the funeral. Inside China, information on the Pope’s death and memorial activities was restricted to the bare minimum facts.

Denouncing the Red Dragon

The discordant relationship between the Vatican and the Chinese communist government has a long history. After the Communist Party assumed power in China in 1951, it severed its relationship with the Vatican. All Chinese churches were required to obtain approval from the Chinese communist government, and Catholics were not allowed to look to the Vatican as their authority. The majority of the Chinese churches, Catholic and Protestant, were closed down in the 1950s, and many priests ended up in prison, causing the churches to go underground. Arrests have since continued unabated. What remained in China were the so-called, "three-self churches," which submitted themselves to the leadership of the Communist Party. After 1957, the "three-self churches" were renamed the "Chinese patriotic churches," and they thereafter served as the model that the CCP used to demonstrate religious freedom in China to the outside world.

The Chinese government has put the number of Christians at around four million. In recent years, however, outside the "three-self churches," many more Chinese people have joined the underground churches. The U.S.-based Cardinal Kung Foundation estimates that there are about 12 million underground Catholic Christians in China who are loyal to the Pope. However, the communist government does not recognize them. Estimates by overseas NGOs put the total number of Chinese underground Christians (Catholic, Protestant, and other sects) at around 40 to 50 million.

In July 1999, the Chinese communist regime began to persecute Falun Gong. In late October, the government rushed a "Resolution on Banning Cults, Preventing and Punishing Cult Activities" through the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress. This resolution has since been used as "the anti-cult law" to legitimize the brutal persecution of Falun Gong as well as other religious organizations, including the underground Christian churches.

On the website of the Committee for Investigation on Persecution of Religion in China (CIPRCthe website can be seen at:, hundreds of reports from China on the persecution of underground Christians are documented. The titles of the reports alone are very revealing: "Anhui Province: Two Female Evangelists Beaten up and Sexually Harassed," "The Police Poured Cold Water on Her to Wake Her Up and Then Continued to Torture Her," and "The Police Informed the Husband to Take Away His Wife, Who Was Beaten Half to Death."
On the same website several Chinese government secret documents that were obtained and released by the CIPRC are available. These documents reveal the CCP’s engagement in the systematic suppression of all religious organizations that are not approved by the Party. Interestingly, in those secret official documents, there were several instances in which the communist government accused the underground Christians of calling the government "the Red Dragon" or saying it is "led by the Red Dragon." These secret official documents were dated as early as March 2001, indicating it’s been several years since the Chinese Christians came to regard the CCP as "the Red Dragon."

Shixiong Li, the founder of CIPRC in New York, might not be the first Chinese Christian to call the Chinese Communist Party "the Red Dragon." However, he probably is the first Chinese Christian to spell it out clearly to the media.

In his interview with a reporter from The Epoch Times in March 2005, Mr. Li explained that "Red Dragon" is another name for Satan. In the Bible it is revealed that in the final days, "that old serpent, called the devil, and Satan" turned into the "Red Dragon." It was cast down unto the earth after being defeated in the heavens, and continues to deceive the whole world. (Rev. 12:7-9)

Li further explained that the CCP is obsessed with blood and violence. It took red as its symbol, and it brutally persecuted the Chinese people, especially those who believed in God. The mainland family churches suffered a great deal under "the Red Dragon" and generally recognized the CCP as the terrible "Red Dragon." Mr. Li also stated that not just in the mainland, but also overseas, Christians and many pastors assumed "the Red Dragon" referred to the contemporary, most formidable red evil specterthe Chinese Communist Party. The prophecy was first known around 2,000 years ago. The Saints of that time could not have been prejudiced against the CCP. Today’s conclusion, therefore, is truly based on the striking similarities between the prophecy’s description and the easily recognizable characteristics of the CCP.

In the Book of Revelation there is also a prophecy about the "mark of the beast."

"And he causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:"(Rev.13:16)

"And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name." (Rev.13:17)

In the March interview, Mr. Li laid out his interpretation of this reference to the mark. "To join a normal organization or to take part in social activities, an oath of admission is not required. Why then do I have to raise my right hand, form it into a fist in front of the red flag, and make a vow to fight for communism throughout my life to be admitted to the Communist Party? The answer is that, by doing so, I have really taken an oath to ‘the Red Dragon’ and vowed to follow him forever, so that the ‘mark of the beast’ will be given to me."

It is no wonder, then, that when many Chinese people renounce their membership in the CCP, they say they are ridding themselves of the "mark of the beast."

Beijing As Babylon

Searching the Google website for the Chinese key word for "Revelation" returned about 55,000 findings. Of course, many of them are cross-links, or the same popular articles posted on different websites. The most popular articles focus on disclosing the CCP as "the Red Dragon." Lin Feng, a writer for the Chinese edition of the Pureinsight website, has written several articles on this topic. His interpretation of "Babylon the Great is Fallen" is particularly interesting.

Chapters 17 and 18 of the Book of Revelation describe a "great whore," which is a city called Babylon.

"A[a]nd I saw a woman sit upon a scarlet colored beast, full of names of blasphemy, having seven heads and ten horns." (Rev. 17:3)

"And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet color, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication." (Rev. 17:4)

"A[a]nd on her forehead was written a name of mystery: "Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations." (Rev. 17:5)

"For all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication, and the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies." (Rev. 18:3)

"And I saw the woman drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus." (Rev. 17:6)

"And the woman which thou sawest is that great city, which reigneth over the kings of the earth." (Rev. 17:18)

"It reminds me of today’s Beijing," wrote Lin Feng in one of his articles. Lin laid out the following three similarities that led him to conclude that Babylon in the prophecy was like today’s Beijing:

First, Beijing is, as Babylon was, the most "controlling" city in the world at its time of dominance.

Beijing is the power center of a vast country. Due to its totalitarian nature, it largely controls the fortunes of 1.3 billion people. In the democratic nations, by contrast, no such totalitarian centralized power exits to such a degree. Instead, checks and balances are built into the political systems, market-place freedom dominates the economic sectors, and the principle of private property is inviolable. The "woman" or "whore" as described in the Book of Revelation is dressed in scarlet, and the Chinese name for the Forbidden City in Beijing is "zi-jin-cheng," which directly translates into "Scarlet Colored Forbidden City." The "beast" on which the "woman" rides is the ruling Chinese Communist Party.

Second, Beijing and Babylon are cities drunken with blood.

Babylon is described in the Book of Revelation as "drunken with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus." (Rev. 17:6) In the past 50 years, Beijing has seen bloodshed from so many of both the faithful and the innocent.

Since 1949, during years of peace, the Beijing government has been responsible for the loss of over 65 million Chinese lives, far exceeding the total of all wartime casualties in the entire last century. According to Chinese government official records, in recent years, a period the CCP regime self-claims as "the best period of human rights," the government has executed twice as many people each year as the entire rest of the world. That marks the Beijing government as an incredibly bloodthirsty regime. Nor has China yet accounted for the large number of extrajudicial killings.

Religious people are clearly the largest group targeted by the Beijing regime. Since 1999, thousands of Falun Gong practitioners have been murdered by extrajudicial killings, hundreds of thousands of them have been detained or imprisoned in forced labor camps. According to the Committee for Investigation on Persecution of Religion in China, of the six million family church members in China, around 2.7 million people have been arrested or detained at least once in the last two and a half decades, 440,000 were sentenced to forced labor camps, and about 20,000 people lost their lives due to religious persecution.

Why did this happen? The modern religions of Buddhism, Taoism, and Christianity are no direct threat to China’s political power. Falun Gong practitioners have no interest in politics and only want to be able to practice their faith to become, as they say, "good" people. Why then is the CCP so preoccupied with persecuting religions and popular qigong practices such as Falun Gong? The reason is that the CCP is a religion, a perverse religion, and it sees the orthodox, legitimate religions and qigong practices like Falun Gong as competitors for the hearts and minds of the masses. Even though the CCP has always proclaimed atheism and forthrightly denies the basis of all spirituality, its practice matches every single trait of a cult.
Consider this. When it was first established, communists regarded Marxism as the absolute truth of the world. It exhorted people to engage in a life-long struggle for the goal of building a "communist heaven on earth." This is, in effect, turning orthodox religion on its head. The CCP truly meets the definition of a perverse religion or cult. To this communist specter-worship cult, people who possess true faith are the Party’s enemy, no matter if they are Tibetan Buddhists, underground Christian church members, or Falun Gong practitioners.

Third, the kings and the merchants of the earth have committed fornication with her.

Beijing has become capitalists’ dreamland in recent years. From the early 1980s to the end of 2003, the accumulated foreign direct investment in China exceeded US$500 billion. In 2004 alone, Beijing brought in US$50 billion in new investments, the largest in the world. The superficial prosperity or the "China miracle" led to a "China rush" in the international business community, "for all nations have drunk of the wine of the wrath of her fornication."

Because of the large amount of foreign investment and consequent trade leverage, the dictators in Beijing are able to entice or even bully foreign companies and governments to make them "cooperate" with Beijing. Some large international corporations, such as Yahoo and Microsoft, engage in self-censorship to please Beijing; others, such as Cisco and Nortel, eagerly sell their most advanced techniques to help Beijing censor the Chinese Internet and monitor the Chinese people in what is called by the Chinese government, the "golden shield." At the United Nation’s human rights summits, Beijing easily blocks debate on its human rights violations.

Leaders from Beijing often bring with them huge potential commercial contracts when visiting foreign countries. Through under-the-table deals, they make even democratic governments do dirty things for Beijing in exchange for business. For example, when Jiang Zemin visited Berlin in April 2004, the German police illegally harassed Falun Gong practitioners, who were peacefully protesting the communist dictator. The French and German governments in 2004 leaned heavily on the European Union to lift the arms embargo against China despite China’s worsening human rights record and repeated threats to Taiwan. For more than three years Alexander Downer, the Australian Minister for Foreign Affairs, signed a certificate every month banning Falun Gong practitioners from protesting outside the Chinese Embassy. When Hu Jintao visited France in January 2004, the government was eager to illuminate the Eiffel Tower in scarlet color to appease the communist leader. Aren’t these examples of "the kings of the earth have committed fornication with her, and the merchants of the earth are waxed rich through the abundance of her delicacies?"
Lin Feng also compared Beijing’s corruption to "Babylon, the great city." Beijing is luxurious in spending on "face projects," such as the Olympics, the national theater, and the CCTV tower, making Western contractors envious. The numerous scandals emerging from Beijing also tell us how corrupt the Chinese officials have become. Government officials have consumed, at government expense, an estimated US$30 billion yearly on dining and drinking at sumptuous banquets. Behind the superficial prosperity, hundreds of millions of Chinese are unemployed and live in abject poverty, and only a small minority of educated Chinese prosper.

The moral depravity of this country, like Babylon, is shown in the reversal of its attitude toward prostitution. When the communists originally seized power in 1949, one of the good things they did was to eliminate prostitution, which the early adherents of communism believed was a product of the decadent capitalism and Western imperialism. Today, the culture has reversed itself, and prostitution is rampant. Among the impoverished, five to six million young women end up in prostitution to make a living. Rampant corruption and desperate poverty make prostitution a booming business in China. It is estimated that about 12 percent of China’s GDP is related to the prostitution business. Beijing is much like the woman, "decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication."

Leon Chao is a writer based in Washington, D.C.

Let Human Rights Guide the Path of Sino-U.S. Relations

Eighty years ago, a thirty-something Mao first let the world know of his unusual revolutionary zeal in a humbly titled article "Investigative Report of the Farmer’s Movement in Hunan Province," which was the very first of his prolific writings on how to take power by violence from the incumbent. There, his assertive words would go down in history—"Who is our friend and who is our foe? This is the number one question we have to figure out for our revolutionary cause."

Eighty years later, a sixty-something Hu, planned his first formal visit to the United States. In Mao’s day, the United States was considered China’s number one enemy and Mao fought to maintain this stance during his entire tenure in Beijing as the leader of the Communist Party, the same post Hu holds now. The world may have changed a lot since then; but the same question remains: Are the United States and China friends now?

Friends or Foes?

For America, the position on this issue is unclear, toggling between "strategic partnership" as announced by an exuberant Clinton during his happy hours in China, and the "strategic competitor" framework that came about just one administration, or two years, later. The Chinese response to the same question, however, seems to be much more resolute and uniform. Most Chinese believe America is trying to keep China down; they also see America as the ultimate obstacle to a satisfactory resolution of the Taiwan issue. And they’ve been convinced by the communist regime that Falun Gong is a force that the CIA cultivated to achieve these objectives against China.

In the past five years or so, this "friends or foes" question has become ever more apparent. The Chinese are more certain that America has ulterior motives against them, fueled by the rising nationalistic sentiment encouraged by the communist regime, and the U.S. position seeming more nuanced, thanks to its growing commercial interest in China.

The United States may believe it has attained a cozy equilibrium in its dealings with China. Remember, there was a glaring absence of the usual "China debate" in the 2004 presidential election, which was once a fierce contest about "who will be the hardest on China." When the two countries first established formal diplomatic relations, this topic was prominently featured in every presidential debate since 1979. And more recently, The New York Times and Wall Street Journal were singing the same tune in their diatribe against Congress’ intervention in the CNOOC-Unocol saga, which, in my view, was almost unprecedented in the two papers’ editorializing on Sino-U.S. relations in the past decade.
Meanwhile, the Americans seem to have comfortably subscribed to the idea that pumping money into China to buttress an otherwise moribund communist regime is doing the Chinese a great service, because, as the seemingly elegant theory of "engagement" goes, "wealth will breed a clamor for freedom and democracy." Unfortunately, so far, there has been no solid evidence to support this argument; on the contrary, the persecutions against the labor activists, underground churches, and the spiritual movement of Falun Gong bear all the hallmarks of a ruthless outrage that the communist regime has been unleashing upon the Chinese people since day one.

Asymmetry in the Equilibrium

The money flowing into China has strengthened the hand of evil, enabling the regime to impose, unscrupulously, its will on the Chinese people. In the Orwellian world of 1984, "Big Brother" monitors every nook and cranny from ubiquitous TV screens, an eerie indication of an open-arms embrace of hi-technology in that consummate authoritarian state. Now, companies like Cisco, Yahoo, and Google are suppliers of similar technology and services to their Big Buddy in Beijing. Even worse, Yahoo has recently been found to serve as a despicable "informant" for Beijing in tracking down the regime’s "most wanted."

The media, especially those with their vital Chinese presence, have turned themselves into busy conveyors of Xinhua news, as if it were ever free media. Recently, a new trend has taken hold, that is, to quote the so-called experts or professors from China’s academic institutions, to give it a thinly veneered, U.S.-styled pretense of impartiality, as if those people, themselves Party members, would not gingerly toe the Party’s lines whenever they speak. I can’t help but wonder: Can’t they find somebody like Mr. Wei Jingsheng, who once spent 18 years in a Chinese prison and dedicated his whole life for China’s freedom, to share his thoughts on what’s truly going on there? And, when they write, would it be hard for them to focus on Mr. Wei’s ideas rather than his speeding ticket or smoking habit?

Sixteen years ago, China’s college students erected a replica of the Statue of Liberty, with a Chinese face, in Tiananmen Square, that was soon smashed into pieces by the PLA’s tanks, along with the student’s aspirations for democracy. That generation used their blood and lives to tell the world they yearn for freedom and they are ready for it, anytime. Today, their successor, the younger generation, is being brain-washed into believing the Party’s glories, and is being instilled with hostility toward the United States from toddler-hood on up. It is saddening to witness the widespread euphoria over the 9/11 tragedy among China’s college students, the hope of China’s future a mere 15 years ago.

As far as the United States is concerned, turning a blind eye to this fundamental asymmetry in the Sino-U.S. relations and regression in China’s quest for democratization is troubling. I agree, it would be good for the United States that this equilibrium would be kept forever, with the Chinese regime getting the assurance of "no regime change" and U.S. business getting the money squeezed from cheap Chinese labor, because one way or the other, money is what a capitalist society is about, right? However, as much as the United States would like it to continue, how do we know China would not upset the balance when it feels it has the power to challenge the status quo? The truth of the matter is, the timetable is now in the hands of Chinese, who have never wavered in their belief that "America is their number one enemy."
It is true that China has opened its doors for foreign capital and investments, but people might neglect the fact that the dominant force of the Chinese economy, the private sector, which accounts for close to three quarters of its GDP, is being closely watched and ruthlessly subdued. This means China is not, as many pundits theorized, embarking on the same path of economic development and political liberalization as experienced by Taiwan and South Korea, which have always placed their private sector as a priority. What is happening in China now is the communist regime is putting up the whole country for sale, to the Western capitalists, to bargain for an exclusion from the "Axis of the Evil," and the Chinese people and the country’s resources are being used in the same way that Kim Jong II "bargains" with his nuclear program. Indeed, political calculations are behind China’s startling fast integration into the world economy; it shows the Chinese regime would rather trust the foreign capital to feed its people, as long as it promises no "regime change," than its own private sector, which, when fully developed, could challenge its monopoly on power.

China’s Timetable to Overturn The Equilibrium

General Zhu Chengwu’s nuke saber-rattling at the United States exposes China’s timetable for breaking off the cozy Sino-U.S. equilibrium. What is of significance was the State Department’s responsethat his remarks were "irresponsible," a reaction that I wish had come from China’s foreign ministry, instead. The word "irresponsible" indicates how unhappy the U.S. government is about the idea of any possibility that the current equilibrium would be overthrownand how committed the government is to the equilibrium being continued. Really, how would the state department know that what General Zhu said is "irresponsible"? Could he happen to be "responsible" this time? China absolutely has the power and the motive to go to war, and it was not the first time a PLA general made such a remark. The only difference was seven years ago, when General Xiong Guangkai said that China’s missiles, according to him, could only reach Los Angeles, a city on the west coast, and now, apparently, they can reach the entire United States.

It is understandable that the United States wants to keep the status quo in its relations with China—who wouldn’t? After all, they don’t have to take responsibility for practices outlawed in the Western society such as profits from bribery, slavery labor, and mindless exploitation of natural resources, all standard practices in China, and can then take credit for "helping China grow and helping the Chinese people gain freedom."
Someone might ask: Why are you so sure China would have the incentive to break this mutually beneficial equilibrium? Isn’t it true that China has shown its "generosity" or "sincerity" by lowering the exchange rate of RMB against the dollar only after tremendous U.S. pressure? Well, the answer to this point comes from the beginning of this article, when I posed the crucial question about whether China and the U.S. are "friends or foes." If you believe, as I do, in what Chairman Mao said, that this question is the first one you should have an answer to, the next question, a natural one, would be: What, then, determines a friend from a foe? Should it be that CCP officials are now dressed more like Westerners? If you take a look at Mao, he, of course was always in a Mao suit, but Hu seems to like dressing like a Westerner. If you think this might be too circumstantial—similar to the fact that the Party secretaries are now more fashionably being called "CEOs" or "Presidents"—you might suggest China’s break-neck growth in GDP as the winning evidence of Westernization working for China. Well, the growth rate might be truly stellar except for possible statistical errors, but remember, it was written into the five-year plan of a Stalinist-era remnant, that economic growth would be always fulfilled, anyway. The underlying reason for the Party’s obsession with economic development is because it realizes that economics is its first obligation so much as it is now a necessity for its political survival. The growth gives it the legitimacy to rule, just as did political movement in the past. Your author once joked to his friends that: If the growth rate is not attained, the Party has a contingency plan that will make it work anyway—"you know what, let’s build another Great Wall. It will attract more tourists, and it will, as you would guess, boost our GDP."

How to Determine a Friend From a Foe?

In your author’s humble opinion, the only way a friend can be told from a foe is for the Americans to check that country’s human rights record. Yes, it is very simple, and it is effective. You may not believe it and might say, "Do you mean we do not need those political scientists or commentators to enlighten us and bombard us with fancy theories and English or even French words (remember détente)?" If you have such an opinion, you should not be faulted, but instead should be told that you’re in good company. When your author visited an editor of a political magazine, he shrugged my idea off with, "It is simply absurd to build diplomacy on human rights." But let’s do a reality check: Have those theories, or compromises, given us lasting peace and benefits or just short-term conveniences with long-term trouble?

I believe that America would be more powerful if it chooses to stick, in form and substance, to the principles created by its founding fathers—and the world would be a much quieter place if that happens. This may sound too simplistic an approach, but in information economics, a signal has to be simple and consistently followed through to be powerful and credible. Just as you know, credibility is the cornerstone of diplomacy and a country’s projection of power or deterrence. Smart deals or gaming will jeopardize this process and complicate already murky situations, rendering them inevitably intractable.
If McArthur had not been recalled by Truman but left to do what he set out to do, there would be no nuke crisis in today’s Korean peninsula—because there would have been no North Korea to begin with. If America persisted in Vietnam longer, it is likely the Cold War would have ended sooner, with many Americans saved from the trauma of the war. That war, many people believe, was lost in the columns of The New York Times. If the United States had not neglected Saddam Hussein’s atrocities against the Kurds and fostered it as a counterbalance to Iran, there would have been no first Gulf War. And if the Bush senior had not ignored the calls from the tens of thousands of uprising Iraqis gathered by his call to overthrow Saddam and later summarily executed by that tyrant, his son might have had a much easier job in the current Gulf War—because winning the "heart and mind," as the campaign was later renamed, would be much harder when people felt betrayed, although their bitter experiences deserved no more than a one sentence mention on CNN.

Like corporate America, U.S. foreign policy sometimes pursues a similar kind of instantaneous gratification, with stock prices being replaced by Gallup poll numbers, and the executive compensation by political capital or survival. By contrast, an authoritarian regime has the advantage of steadfastly implementing its long-term strategy with an iron hand, and without the vagaries induced by countless interests diverting its attention from the central issue. China has been studying America as its future rival, but the United States has not figured out the first question, whether China is its friend or foe. No wonder the recent laments in The Washington Post by a congressional leader that "China apparently knows more about us than we do about them."

It is right that there is no such department of study on university campuses called "human rights." As human rights ideas, perceived to be lofty and grand, are at the same time, too empty, trite, or even irrelevant. But human rights hold the key to numerous knotty issues that are baffling researchers in other departments for many years. For example, without the moral compass of human rights, how and when will the endless crises in the Middle East have at least the hope of ever ending? Before the killings by Israeli soldiers and Palestinian bombers are condemned in the same manner, absent any biases or political agenda, as violations of basic human rights, I do not think there is any peaceful process that will lead us anywhere.

On the other hand, if the United States, as the sole superpower, holds fast to the simple and consistent message of human rights and freedom, it will gain more support and respect, and many problems will melt away, of their own accord. This is because when human rights are truly respected as they should be in foreign relations, the United States is not just dealing with a few VIPs of a particular government, many of whom are odious tyrants or terrorists themselves, but with the vast number of that country’s populations—and believe me, people’s memories are enduring, especially when you show some genuine care about their future.
Japan and Korea

The experiences of China’s two neighboring countries, Japan and South Korea, lend support to this argument. It is well known that since the 1950s Japan has been the hub for America’s presence in Asia, and is its most reliable ally in that area. So much so that one Japanese Prime Minister once proudly called his country "America’s unsinkable aircraft carrier." Surveys suggest over 80 percent of Japanese admire America and treasure their friendship, despite the brutal war the two countries fought 60 years ago. In South Korea, a country that would be nonexistent without GIs’ sacrifices and even now only shielded from Kim Jong II’s firepower largely by the U.S. military, a recent Wall Street Journal article shows less than 20 percent of its population even like Americans, and U.S. products are far less popular there as they are in Japan. What is going on?

Again, it is about winning people’s hearts and minds, which can only be done by a genuine interest in their freedom and human rights. The same McArthur, thwarted in Korea by an administration more interested in keeping the "strategic balance" in that area, was luckily left alone in Japan. He wrote the current Japanese constitution, and implemented many reform programs that culminated into today’s thriving, liberal democratic, Japan. Japanese revered him as their savior, and they voluntarily lined the streets to see him off.

In South Korea, the United States has followed the so-called pragmatic policy, supporting military dictatorships to achieve expediency and short-term benefits, even when the Korean people had an uprising in Kwangju in 1987 against the military strongman.

The irony in this story is instructive, in many ways. For businesses preoccupied with building their beachheads in the tough-and-tumble Chinese markets, the true visionaries will know they should invest in China’s heart and mind, by bringing freedom and human rights to the Chinese. Although it is hard to resist the temptation for quick money by colluding with the festering regime and its corrupted officialdom, the Chinese people will remember those who truly care about them, and believe me, those are the ones who will be rewarded in the future.

To the author, it is also disturbing to note the loose definition of "ally" in the U.S. dictionary. Just when you were told Pakistan’s General Musharraf was the people’s enemy because he led a coup that dissolved the democratically elected government, the same general became a hero in America’s anti-terrorist campaign the very next moment. Similarly, the Chinese communist regime has been portrayed as an "ally" in America’s efforts to rid North Korea of its nuclear capabilities, although the North has been China’s lap dog to make trouble for the United States-and a trump card in its deck to "deal" with the United States. Next time you hear the term "ally," please remember Mr. Bin Laden was once in that category in Washington, too.
China: The Bush Legacy

Several months ago, this magazine reported that an overseas Chinese language newspaper called The Epoch Times published a series of commentaries on the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which has triggered a massive wave of Chinese people quitting the CCP. So far, 4.5 million Chinese have recanted their association with the CCP, sometimes at risk of their career and even lives. Once again, the Chinese people remind us that they are ready to free themselves from the shackles of the CCP—anytime.

While we applaud the 4.5 million who represent a larger number of Chinese who would part ways with the CCP, the silence is so deafening here in the United States that a question has to be asked: Is the United States ready for the long overdue exit of the CCP from the world stage? Twenty years ago, this would have sounded silly to ask, because America’s answer would be a resounding "Sure. Anytime." But now it becomes a question that is worth looking at.

True, China has been subsidizing our lifestyle and enriching certain sectors of the economy, but a prospering China under the leadership of a soulless totalitarian regime is perhaps even more dangerous. If you share the author’s hobby in studying Mao’s works to better understand this weird creature called the "CCP," whose frictions with the Soviet Union had for 20 years been an enigma for no less an expert than the CIA, Mao had another exhortation that we should heed. He said, in the early 1960s, that "all the imperialists are like dust in a room that has to be swept; and if your broomstick isn’t sweeping, the dust will never leave us." So is the absolute power of the CCP—and the nightmarish torments that the Chinese people have been subjected to. Indeed, the CCP is a tumor in the healthy body of human civilization. No matter how it metamorphoses for its survival, it remains a malignancy that is better to be rid of—the sooner the better.

At a time when President Bush is considering how he will be remembered in history, the author would suggest that he echo the call of the 4.5 million Chinese, to end the tyrannical rule of the CCP. This will be a legacy comparable to Reagan’s dissolution of the "evil empire" without firing a shot.

Eighteen years ago, a prescient Reagan spoke to an audience in West Berlin, in front of the Berlin Wall, "Mr. Gorbachev, please pull down this wall!" It only took two years for his words to become reality. When President Bush met with Hu Jintao, I hope he highlighted their conversation with a request, "Mr. Hu, please tear down the Great Wall of Red Terror, and join the 4.5 million Chinese ready to move on into a new life and new era."

John Li is a New-York-based freelance writer on Sino-U.S. relations.

Canadian MP Feels Beijing’s Pressure in Hong Kong

When Robert Anders, member of Canadian Parliament and an avid supporter of China’s democratization, flew to Hong Kong to attend the "Future of China Forum" on September 29, 2005, he thought it would be a trip just like the one he made to the Press Club in Washington, D.C. two months earlier. Everything went as planned until the taxi that was supposed to take him to the Conrad, the premier Hong Kong hotel where the forum was supposed to take place, instead changed directions and brought him to a nearby public park. He was told that, at the last minute, the hotel reneged on the contract it had signed with the forum organizers.

"The Future of China" is an international forum planned by The Epoch Times Hong Kong Branch to discuss the Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party, a series of articles published by The Epoch Times newspaper back in November of 2004. The Nine Commentaries systematically exposed the crimes that the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) committed against the Chinese people from the time of its rise to power to the present.

The articles have so irked the CCP that, inside China, the Nine Commentaries has been listed as the number one forbidden book. Anyone caught talking about it, spreading information about it, or handing the book to another person, will face severe punishment. Lu Xuesong, a teacher at Jilin Academy of Art, told her class about the Nine Commentaries website and the massive resignations from the CCP. As a result, without any explanation, the Academy suspended her from her teaching position. When the school refused to give her an explanation, she posted her situation on the Internet. The school then told her the reason. Her case has become well known and is discussed widely on Chinese websites. Zhang Lin, a dissident writer, published two articles supporting the Nine Commentaries on the Communist Party. He was arrested on January 29, 2005. On August 2, he was sentenced to five years in prison for the "crime of encouraging people to overthrow the state power."

"The Future of China" forum was the first public discussion in the English language of the Nine Commentaries in this Special Administrative Region. In addition to Mr. Anders, guest speakers included Ming Chu-Cheng, Professor of Political Science at National Taiwan University, and Szeto Wah, former Member of Hong Kong’s Legislative Council.

On September 29, the day before the event was scheduled to take place at the Conrad’s Hennessy Room, the hotel’s management notified The Epoch Times that the room had "serious flooding" and asked that the forum be transferred to another place.

The newspaper staff then made an onsite visit. Not only was there no evidence of floodingthe room in fact had a function going on during the inspection.
Considering the confusion that would arise if the forum were moved at the last minute, the organizers told hotel management that they found the room’s condition perfectly acceptable and assured management that they would accept any risk associated with using the room in the condition they found it.

At around 7 a.m. on September 30, the Conrad Hotel staff removed the sign advertising the forum from outside the hotel. When the newspaper contacted the Conrad Hotel to inquire, they were told that the hotel had unilaterally cancelled the contract.

The forum was scheduled to start at 2 p.m. The Conrad’s last-minute decision left the organizers only with the option of moving the forum to the public park, which they were able to do thanks to the favorable weather condition and permission granted by the police department. The forum finally began at 2:30 p.m. in an open area in nearby Hong Kong Park and had a good turnout. According to the organizers, a considerable number of consulates sent congratulatory letters and representatives to the forum. Legislators, lawyers, and scholars also attended.

The incident may not have been a surprise to those who are familiar with the current political climate in Hong Kong, but it caught Mr. Anders off guard nonetheless. After all, Hong Kong has been a democratic society and should enjoy full freedom like any Western society. Beijing’s influence in Hong Kong’s affairs has increased since it was taken over by the mainland in 1997. Many believe that the hotel revoking its contract with The Epoch Times is evidence of that increasing influence.

The change of location was a relatively minor tribulation for another speaker, Professor Ming Chu-Cheng. Initially, Hong Kong’s Immigration Department rejected his visa application, which had never happened to him before. When he was finally granted the visa and arrived at Hong Kong International airport, officials from the Immigration Department interrogated him for nearly two hours.
Nor was this Mr. Anders’ first encounter with Chinese interference. He had the following to say about being physically assaulted by Chinese diplomats in February 2000:

"I wore [a T-shirt that talked about Falun Gong] out to a function that was being hosted by the People’s Republic’s Embassy here, in this building [Parliament in Canada]. I stood at the back of the room, and then all of a sudden I had four or five men surround me and start to harass me, and point fingers, and jostle me physically, saying that I had to leave, that I wasn’t welcome, go home, you know, cowboy, you don’t know what you’re doing… and what crossed my mind immediately was four or five people that comprise a gang on behalf of the People’s Republic of China think they can get away with doing that to me as a Member of Parliament, on Canadian soil, in my place of work, in the House of Commonscan you imagine what they’re doing to people back home in their own country? It was absolutely over the top! And then when a media reporter came over with his camera, they started to grab his camera, they tried to force it down to the ground, they told him to go away… They were issuing orders to a member of the free press here in Canada. … It was absolutely outrageous. And it just proved what Falun Dafa is up against. … We’re at a very critical moment. If we don’t take a stand now, history will look back at us and sigh."

The incident in Hong Kong adds to Mr. Anders’ firsthand experience of CCP interference and gave him a glimpse of how Hong Kong’s freedom of speech is eroding. Commenting on the event, he said that his Hong Kong trip would definitely influence his future China policy in Parliament.