Zhao Ziyang, the former general secretary of the CCP, died on the morning of January 17, 2005. In the following report, Epoch Times reporter Xin Fei interviews political scientist, Mr. Wang Juntao about the Tiananmen Square Massacre and the possible effect that Zhao’s death could have on Chinese politics.

Wang Juntao comes from a military family. He was initially jailed at the age of 17 in 1976 for giving speeches and for posting his four poems around Tiananmen Square during the “April 5th Movement” to show respect for the late premier Zhou Enlai. After the government recognized the correctness of the “April 5th Movement,” Wang was elected as an Alternate Member of the Central Communist Youth League. In 1978, Wang attended Peking University, studying in the Department of Technical Physics. During the Democracy Wall Movement (1979-1981), Wang, with Zhou Weimin and Chen Ziming, founded the Beijing Spring Magazine. Wang was also a key staff member of the Beijing Social and Economic Sciences Research Institute when it was founded by Chen Ziming in 1986.

In the 1989 Tiananmen Square Democratic Movement, Wang was recommended for participation in the work of the United Capital Patriotic and Constitution-Protection Meeting, in cooperation with the Beijing College Autonomy League, and the Beijing Intelligentsia Autonomy League. Consequently, Wang was considered a ringleader by the Chinese government, and was wanted on charges relating to an abortive attempt to overthrow the government and to counterrevolutionary agitation. In October of 1989, he was arrested. In February 1991, he was sentenced to a 13-year prison term by the Intermediate People’s Court of Beijing.

Under international pressure, in April 1994, Wang was released on medical bail and exiled to the USA, where he earned a Ph.D. Political Science at Columbia University under the supervision of Prof. Andrew Nathan, the editor of The Tiananmen Papers.

---

Xin Fei reports:
“As a key figure in the 1989 Tiananmen Square Democratic Movement, what’s your opinion on Mr. Zhao Ziyang?”

Wang: “Back then, what impressed me the most was that, during the students’ hunger strike at the end of May, Zhao Ziyang came to Tiananmen Square after having expressed his opinion that he was against the military cracking down on students. He knew his political career would be over. He said, “I come here too late!” When I saw him on television at that time, I also said in my heart, ‘He did come too late, and so did the CCP, launching such a massive campaign, and with the students paying so dearly with their lives.’

“From that moment I felt that his coming signaled that he was on our side. Frankly, we weren’t even in the same camp in 1980’s. We were hoping that China could be on the way to freedom and democracy, while Zhao was focusing on economic construction and reform in the early phase of the 1980's, transferring to political reform in the latter phase.

“Fifteen years later, I admire Zhao Ziyang even more deeply. Compared to the autarchy of Deng Xiaoping and the subsequent leaders, Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, what Zhao did in the1980s was really not easy and was in fact extraordinary.

“We were so young at that time; the enthusiasm we held for the nation’s development was well above average. Zhao took our side at the expense of his political career and 15 years of his freedom, and he wasn’t set free up until his death. On this point he is pretty remarkable.”

(Wang chokes with sobs) “We are really sorry to hear of Zhao’s death.”

Reporter: “Do you think that the leaders of the Chinese Communist Party will restore the reputation of Mr. Zhao and institute justice with regards to the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre?”

Wang: “I think that the leaders of the CCP now are mediocre, so it’s not possible for them to do so. They want to solve problems, but they don’t have the courage and resolution to do so. They have little knowledge and experience. They lack the vision and creativity of 1980s leaders like Zhao Ziyang, Hu Yaobang, and Wan Li.

“I believe that they know the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre was wrong. They know that they wronged Zhao; that Deng Xiaoping was mistaken, and that Jiang Zemin was also wrong. They did something despicable to Zhao Ziyan, and to the people who have suffered from the 1989 oppression. However, they don’t have the courage or the resolution to correct those wrongs. They worry that any action will result in big political changes in China, and they cannot control such changes.

“Restoring Zhao’s reputation would mean admitting that the CCP was wrong 15 years ago. Even if they don’t restore Zhao’s reputation, they cannot explain clearly why Zhao, who instituted great reforms, was deprived of freedom for 15 years without a reason. Even Deng Xiaoping, who gave the lowest appraisal of Zhao, has also said that Zhao’s only mistake was ‘supporting turmoil and the separation of the party.’ That is, Zhao’s only mistake was his decision in 1989. As for the resolutions he made before 1989, Deng has declared that not one word can be changed. This indicates that all the work that Zhao had done was valid.

“The crime of ‘supporting turmoil and the separation of the party’ was investigated without a result. The party should have restored Zhao’s reputation at that time. They should have restored his position in the party, but they did not do so. The problem presented to the CCP by Zhao is similar to that posed by Falun Gong. That is, on making a mistake, it needs to make more mistakes in order to cover its first mistake. It must go on like this.

“Therefore, as for restoring Zhao’s reputation, I think it will not be until the last moment, when society undergoes a fundamental political change, that he will be vindicated. Take the Communist Party of the Soviet Union as an example; many people knew that Khrushchev was wronged and it was inappropriate to support Stalin at that time. However, if the USSR had not undergone a fundamental political reform, Stalin would not have been criticized, and Khrushchev would have received a fair evaluation.”

Reporter: “The death of Mr. Hu Yaobang triggered the 1989 Tiananmen Square Massacre. Now the authorities are trying hard to prevent the news of Zhao’s death from spreading. How do you think the public will respond?”
WANG: “This is the problem that concerns everyone the most. Will Zhao’s death cause political turmoil like the death of Zhou Enlai did in 1976 and Hu Yaobang in 1989? I don’t think it is a possibility. There are three reasons.
"Firstly, Zhao did not have any political faction. His history of working in central government was not a long one. He was not like Zhou and Hu, who had good relationships with many high-ranking officials in central government.

Therefore, when they passed away, and people voluntarily mourned for them and turned against their political enemies, many leaders in central government did not get involved,and some even underhandedly supported this. However, the leaders nowadays did not have such a relationship with Zhao. Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao see political stability as being much more important than returning justice to Zhao. When Zhou and Hu passed away, the main leaders in the central government thought differently. They felt that giving a fair appraisal of Zhou and Hu was most important.

“Secondly, from the stand point of Chinese people, despite their dissatisfaction with current society, unlike around 1976 and 1989, now there is no mutual agreement on common issues among people. These disagreements divide people and their leaders into different groups, each emphasizing different issues, and their differing opinions offset each other. People also worry that any political instability may impact on their vested interests; thus they are unwilling to step out. Especially regarding today’s young people, they don’t understand lots of historical facts, and they lack the motivation to start any political movement.

“Third, there was an idealist atmosphere during the years of 1976 and 1989; people were willing to fight and sacrifice for a better China. There is no such atmosphere in today’s China. People are more practical and material; they are not willing to sacrifice for any ideal, and they don’t believe there could be a better society for China. Under such circumstances, everyone is trying to gain maximum personal benefits, and they lack the motivation to change society or to resolve any significant issues.

“For these reasons, I don’t think the passing away of Zhao Ziyang will trigger any political movement like the deaths of Zhou Enlai and Hu Yaobang did. However, it does not mean that Zhao’s death will have no impact on China at all. Neither do I agree with the comment that the death of Zhao Ziyang represents the end of an era in China; that his dream is over. It is not true, because Zhao Ziyang is a political symbol, reminding people that there are at least two urgent issues in China that have yet to be resolved.

“The first issue is the Tiananmen Square Massacre; it is a deep pain in every Chinese person’s heart. You can tell this from how nervous the current CCP leaders are every year around the June 4 anniversary; a big political event could be triggered every year if they weren’t careful. During the Tiananmen Square Student Movement, Zhao Ziyang walked up to students and said “I came too late,” indicating his support of the students. His subsequent suffering showed that he was the highest ranking victim of the Massacre, and naturally became a representation of the movement. The death of Zhao Ziyang reminds people of the unfair treatment they have received.

“Secondly, compared to the limited and abnormal reforms carried out by Deng Xiaoping and Jiang Zemin, Zhao Ziyang represented a more comprehensive reform strategy which was composed of both economic and political reforms. Such a strategy has became more important today, after Deng and Jiang’s limited reforms have caused many social problems for China. Many Chinese people did not benefit from the limited reforms; today more people accept Zhao’s comprehensive reform strategy. As a political symbol for such a comprehensive reform strategy, people will continue to accept and to pay attention to Zhao Ziyang.

“In summary, because of his representative position in these two issues, Zhao’s death will cause Chinese people to rethink China’s future in a deeper and more calm manner. Though his death did not cause a political earthquake like those of Zhou Enlai and Hu Yaobang, it will, however, have a deep impact on Chinese society.”

Reporter: “In history, many leaders of the CCO have suffered the same miserable destiny. They were elbowed out by other CCP leaders. Was this determined by the characteristics of the Communist Party itself?”

Wang: “There are changes in the political system; leaders also change too — this is normal. On a certain level, political science studies how leaders are changed. This is normal. No matter whether they are leaders of a party, or leaders of a country, they have to be replaced.

“But the CCP’s replacement system is never outlined. Criteria are not specified either. When Hua Guofeng was replaced, from the point of view of procedure, it was favored by the public . However, when Hu Yaobang was replaced, public opinion was not favorable. Also, the criterion was not right. Hu Yaobang had gained popularity among most party members and the people; yet he was replaced. But at least he kept his Political Bureau Committee Member's status, and he could walk around freely.

“But Zhao Ziyang's replacement wasn't according to the regular procedure; the criterion was more preposterous and disgusting. He was still a citizen of China and a member of the CCP, but he was deprived of his freedom for 15 years without trial. He didn't gain his freedom until death. Therefore, this problem is not about replacement of leaders, it's about the procedure, the standard. Also, whether such a leader could enjoy the freedom of a regular citizen is something I doubt. I think this is a questionable area; it's a problem within the communist system.”

Reporter: “Someone has pointed out that the Communist Party will not tolerate the return of human nature, and thus all people with a conscience, good moral standard and desire for justice inside and outside of the Communist Party wouldn’t be tolerated by them. What’s your opinion on that?"

Wang: "It's a problem caused by the system. People, regardless of whether Chinese, American, or from other countries, they are roughly the same — it's the system that’s different. Under the same system, some people are willing to be a good people, some will be bad people. But a good system can lead more people to be good. A bad system can cause more people to commit crimes, and even good people have no control of themselves in such a harsh environment, often doing something unwillingly; and that includes the leaders.

"Some years ago, a provincial level official talked about his ideological changes. When he was first appointed as an official, faced with poor farmers, he would donate his own money; he even cried. How could such a person as this degenerate into a corrupt criminal? I think it's a problem of the system, and China's problem is the communist system. This system leads people along a bad road, and a man has to be corrupt to be more "advanced." Good people are being weeded out. The will to be a good person is diminishing, while the motivation for being bad is getting stronger."

Reporter: "Recently, many people have given up hope on the communist party. The amount of people resigning from the party inside and outside of China are increasing. Various regions have held ‘Fairwell to the Chinese Communist Party" activities, What do you think of this? What is the meaning of it?"

Wang: "These people made their intuitive choice. In fact, people who believe in communism might not completely understand it, let alone those who don't believe in it. Even the people following the party are not firm in their beliefs. In the past, tens of thousands of people followed the party, saying that they carry their head for the party, dedicating their body to the party, saying they are willing to die for communism. It looks very real, yet they don’t actually understand communism. This is crazy If they truly understood it, then they wouldn’t follow it blindly.

“Under a good system, sham people are not too problematic, since they need society in order to function and voters to support them in order to maintain status. Under a bad system, though, even honest men will bring disasters. Looking at the Cultural Revolution — in it many people would beat others when instructed, purely because they heeded Chairman Mao's words. These kinds of people made a huge mistake in Chinese history.”

Reporter: "What’s your view on the CCP right now?"

Wang: "China has stepped into a post-communist era, meaning that communism has lost its ideology; lost its power to attract people. It depends completely on profits to maintain it, and it has moved qualitatively in a degenerate direction. I lost my confidence in the communist system a long time ago."