The farewell ceremony of Zhao Ziyang, former general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, was held on Jan. 29 at Baobaoshan Public Cemetery in Beijing. Xinhua News Agency released a brief biography of Zhao Ziyang that failed to mention that Zhao had been state council premier and general secretary of the CCP. Nor did it mention Zhao’s important contributions to China’s opening door policy and economic reforms. Instead, it pointed out that Zhao “had made a serious mistake” in 1989 (for refusing use violence to suppress the student’s peaceful demonstration).

Jiao Gambia, an associate professor in the School of Journalism and Communication in Peking University in Beijing, agreed to an interview recently with The Epoch Times.

He published an essay entitled “Declaration of the Campaign Against the Central Propaganda Department” last year. His course in Peking University was cancelled and he could no longer advise graduate students for their master’s degrees after that. In early November, the Central Propaganda Department issued an official document with a blacklist and prohibited Chinese media from publishing any of his writings, as well as those of Li Rui (former secretary of Mao Zedong), Wang Yi (writer), Yu Jie, Mao Yushi (economist) and Yao Lifa (human rights advocate for peasants).

Epoch Times: Mr. Jiao, did you attend Zhao Ziyang’s farewell ceremony?

Jiao: No. I couldn’t attend the ceremony because I didn’t have the ticket. I went out around 7 a.m. and planned to go to Babaoshan to take a look. I didn’t expect that a few young men from the police substation in our school were waiting outside my apartment building. As soon as I stepped out of the building, they asked me where I was going. I told them I just wanted to go around. They said I’d better not go anywhere. I haven’t been treated like this before.

ET: How did you feel when you heard of Xinhua News Agency’s news release?

Jiao: Well, it’s progress after the efforts of more than 10 days. Otherwise, (Zhao) would probably not even have had this news released about him.

ET: So you felt that it was a result of the joint efforts from the international communities?

Jiao: Of course. Definitely. I think this news release was about 200 to 300 words. At least it was better than only 50 cold words (in the first release about Zhao’s death).

ET: There were more words, but many were disappointed because they didn’t think it was a fair appraisal (of Zhao’s career), which they had expected.

Jiao: It was probably because there was no force to balance the so-called “conservative force.” In the previous 10 days, different forces were surely working on this. Some probably hope to give Zhao a positive appraisal. Some probably hope to give him a bad appraisal or to maintain the conclusion made in 1989. I believe both sides were striving to get what they wanted. After 11 or 12 days, they ended up with this conclusion. Obviously it didn’t change the conclusion made 16 years ago.

ET: What kind of potential effect do you think this conclusion would have?

Jiao: I think it will definitely have an effect, but may not be some specific effect in the short term. However, history is fair. Zhao will have the position in history he deserved. But the different forces cannot achieve a compromise yet.

ET: Many said the final judgment announced on Zhao after his death was not fair. It was another big tragedy and another unjust case.

Jiao: I think it is mainly an issue of the direction of Chinese society. How to evaluate Zhao was not so important to him any more. It was not important to him even when he was alive. After more than a dozen years (under house arrest), I believe he was already disillusioned with the mortal world, without caring much about honor or disgrace anymore. Even if he was properly appraised, so what? I don’t think it makes much difference to him. I think what’s more significant is, (a good appraisal of Zhao) would give Chinese people some hope about democratic politics or political civilization. But they now refused to give people such hope, and there is nothing we can do about it.

A person becomes a part of history sooner or later. If he was right or if he represented the future of a civilization, I don’t think the honor or disgrace during a person’s lifetime is important after 100 years, 200 years or 300 years. In China, apparently, if (the government) had given a good appraisal about the June 4th event at this time, it probably would indicate that a big political change had occurred in a short period of time. But it does not seems possible now.

Zhao’s funeral was not arranged until after more than 10 days after his death. This will become a new topic about the June 4th event and about him. In other words, in the future, the issue of the June 4th event will probably start with Zhao’s experience. We either have to redress him, or give him the fair appraisal that he deserved. Zhao was a representative figure anyway. And his experience was a representative also. His experience had left a new wound in the public’s hearts. It’s another unfair case.

ET: Zhao's family must have felt very sad about such a result.

Jiao: Not really. His family had accepted it for 15 years. As a Chinese, you have to tolerate even if you can’t. That’s Chinese. Zhao’s family members still have to live the rest of their lives. Many Chinese people have died, didn’t their families have to bear with that also?

ET: Some people said that the way the CCP handled this issue actually hurt the CCP. What do you think?

Jiao: Obviously, they want to stabilize things for as long as they can. For instance, if something would not occur until tomorrow, then they would wait until tomorrow for it to occur, if they had such a choice. This is exactly the problem in China. Many problems that should have been solved before were not resolved, and new problems kept piling up and had to be solved sooner or later. The issue of press freedom and literacy freedom, the issues that have been resolved 300 years ago in other countries, are still not resolved in China. Future generations just have to suffer from the negligence of their predecessor.

ET: It was reported that, Deng Xiaoping said to “wait for the future generations to solve” the issue of June 4th before his death. So he knew he had done wrong.

Jiao: Of course he did. He surely thought about the things he did. (That’s why) he didn’t even leave his bone ashes.

ET: If he knew it was wrong, why did he do it?

Jiao: That’s what I just said: If something doesn’t have to happen today, then let it happen tomorrow.

ET: They want to maintain so-called temporary stability, even at the price of stability of the Communist Party itself?

Jiao: Killing is not a big deal to the Communist Party. They have killed too many people. To them, anyone who may pose a threat to their ruling is not regarded as a person. Instead, he is an obstacle or garbage. He would never be regarded as a living being by the CCP.

Also, they probably have their own considerations. They thought what they did was the best way. Even now, don’t they still say that the suppression on June 4th was right? Don’t they claim they had more than 10 years of stable period at present (because of the suppression)? They have their own logic.

What we want to say is, China is probably even better without the killings 15 years ago. However, no way we can say this, there is no place for us to say so. Moreover, even society seems to be peaceful and the economics seems to maintain a trend of development because of the killing 15 years ago, (as justified by the CCP), we shouldn’t say the killing was right. Only executioners had such a logic.

ET: Why would the current CCP leaders like to be the scapegoats?

Jiao: Because they know how big the mistake they made (in 1989) and they know how weak they are.

ET: Many said that the CCP would greatly lose people’s support doing so.

Jiao: The CCP handled Zhao’s death without justice and fairness. It sacrificed everything, especially the normal sentiment that human beings have and the basic belief in politics. Do you think it worth such sacrifice?

Well, the CCP does not care about this anymore. It doesn’t care about political morals or individual morals. It just resorts to any means to delay its fate for as long as it can.

ET: Do you think the CCP loses face in the international society on this issue?

Jiao: Of course, but they don’t care. The rulers are like that. I once wrote an article about the validity of the United Nations. I don’t think the United Nations itself is legitimate, because many members of the United Nations are not governments elected by people. Presidents in some countries were even murderers. There are many villains in the United Nations. Many leaders of the UN members are villains. Actually many countries in the world are led by villains. However, it is a sad thing to have undignified leaders in such a big country as China.

ET: It was reported that the CCP frequently collaborated with some other evil countries in the UN to resist propositions by some righteous countries. The CCP sent many people go canvassing abroad whenever there was a conference in the UN.

Jiao: Every time the UN has a proposal on democracy, freedom, and human rights, the CCP finds some villains to oppose it. It has always been like that. For instance, the UN Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization was ruined by these countries. The United States withdrew from UNESCO in 1983, and the United Kingdom withdrew from it in 1984. Why did they withdraw from it? Because it had become a club of those villains, a club for those international political villains. They voted against anything good in UNESCO. Anything related to press freedom or human rights, anything good, they voted against it and vetoed it. UNESCO has become a club to use U.S. funding to scold the U.S.

ET: You mentioned press freedom. Many people in China probably don’t know about Zhao Ziyang’s death yet.

Jiao: I am sure many people don’t know about it. If one does not read the newspaper (carefully), he will not know it, because the news was only released in the newspaper. Xinhua News Agency only released about 50 words, and hid it on a place hard to find. They surely will do bad things all the way to the end.

ET: Will the public and the history tolerate the CCP in the end?

Jiao: It takes time. It takes time for the spring to come one day after another, and it takes time for the coldness of winter to go away one day after another.

ET: But the winter is here, spring is not far away.

Jiao