1. Maybe a bit premature, but sure looks like the U.S. and China are working toward a deal that will allow Chen to leave: http://news.yahoo.com/china-says-activist-apply-study-abroad-061440352.html The whole "study abroad" thing is, of course, a way for China to give Chen what he wants (go to the US) without looking like they are capitulating. 2. If things work out, this will sure make the people screaming "betrayal!," and "Obama ****ed up!" look like ass clowns trying to prematurely score political points. This is not a good day for the likes of basso and Mitt Romney. 3. Incidentally, I always kind of suspected that some sort of resolution is gonna be reached. China doesn't really derive any benefit from having the guy and his family slaughtered. I also thought, at that time, it would be a bad move for Romney to try to score political points this early in the negotiations. If this gets worked out, the Obama camp (most likely through the State Department) is probably gonna release some sort of statement that says "We are happy to finally reach a satisfactory resolution given the complexity and sensitivity of the situation and despite the backseat drivers who trying to take political advantage of the situation. Mr. Chen and his family will be safe and be able to apply to come to the U.S."
Also Chen is different from your typical Chinese dissidents. Dissidents like Liu Xiaobo, Wang Dan, etc openly criticize the Chinese political regime, Chen is more of legal rights activist that doesn't necessarily challenge the Chinese political system. He said "Dear Mr. Prime Minister Wen Jiabo, our party ... and please send a working group ..." in his youtube appeal video for an investigation of his alleged brutalization of his family. So you can see his issue is rather about a few people under the regime, but not necessarily the regime itself, at least he never said so in the public. I believe he did not want leave China before he was sent to the Beijing hosptial, which is accounted by the New York times. Now, of course he has a change of heart, because he can sense CCP is pulling swiching and baiting on him, which is all too familiar to Chinese. Now, on to the US, to me the US just quickly figured that it doesn't have much to gain here, given the restriction of international protocol. Really, Chen's problem is that he feel his and his family's safety cannot be gurantteed and it is rather about Chen's individual human rights. With this, I think the US must be very careful, with all congressional hearing going on. If the US decides to go out of her way to take Chen in this time, is US going to take any and all Chinese person now turning to the US embassy for help? There are too many people in China like Chen, with their individual rights violated. I know many Chinese lawyers are constantly man-handeled in China and would love to leave China too. And how about anybody asks help from the US. How about those poor people cross the border. Arguably they want to come to US for their human rights too. So where is the stopping point. At some point, the US is not going to look like the values she claims to be. On that calculus, you can see why the US embassy is quick to give somewhat cold shoulder to Chen -- my speculations.
The irony there is that these very people want to put land mines on the border if they get their ways and yet accusing Obama of not trying hard taking in a non-US national from Chinese soil. Talking about self-serving ...
As YallMean noted Chen's an interesting case. He really isn't trying to take on the CCP as he is trying to get local governments to live up to their own rules. For example forced abortions are technically illegal in the PRC. I agree that some face measure will happen as neither the US or PRC really want this situation to drag out.
Beijing (CNN) -- A possible breakthrough emerged on Friday in the case of Chen Guangcheng, the Chinese activist who made a daring escape from house arrest and took refuge in the U.S. Embassy in Beijing before venturing out amid U.S.-Chinese negotiations over his future. The Chinese government noted that he could apply to travel to the United States to study -- a development that the United States instantly cited as an encouraging sign of progress in what has been a thorny and controversial impasse. "As a Chinese citizen, he may apply like other Chinese citizens according to the laws and normal procedures of the relevant departments," Liu Weimin, a spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said in a statement posted on the ministry's website. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said the United States is "encouraged" by the statement. Thanks Obama! (basso do you ever get tired of looking like a fool?)
Right, this thing is sticky for the US embassy. Right or wrong, China does have its own laws and right to enforce those laws. Unless it is an egrageous violation of basic humanity, which I think Chen's case might be that, the US embassy really can't take in Chinese nationals claiming their rights being violated viewed under the U.S. values.
Looks like NYU Law is going to give him a scholarship and China will issue Chen a passport. Now, US once again defends the very claimed value that set the west apart from the rest of the world, a cold war style win, good for the US. China saves its face such that it is no longer a soverign issue but rather allowing Chen to study abroad under the Chinese law, good for China. Chen and his family, I am just happy for them. NYU law is good, I think William Cohen of NYU Law made it happen. If you are interested, please subscribe Cohen's Chinese Law professor blog. It is pretty good. What is at loss though ... and long sigh from me, is the chance of legal rights, if will, movment in China, the rest of Chinese people whose legal rights are being violated on a enormorous scale. I am not happy for that end.
I don't think Chen is the end all of legal rights being enforced in the PRC. There are several others who are doing similar things to him. I was at a talk about the construction business in China recently and the speaker pointed out that labor activists are using Chinese law to successfully press for fair wages for employees. The PRC doesn't yet have a rule of law culture yet but it is getting there.
I hope not not. But it seems to be a pattern now the more famous activists are either slienced, e.g. Liu, or sent out of the country. Not good examples for the gross-root ones to look up to. I don't blame Chen for his choice a bit,a nd I think he made the right choice for himself and his family. But to the general cause of legal rights movement,if there is one, this is a blow. Basically, Chen resorted to the US for help and no longer feel he can do what he believes in China. Of course, the initial asylum talk was very very embrassing to Beijing, but on the other hand the US now views Chen of national pride. But what about the real issue of Chinese legal rights. China is more like rule by law. The judiciary is no independent. The legislature is not independent. The CCP is openly outside of the law. This is all legitimized under the pursuit of communism led by the CCP for the good of Chinese peopel, ratified as article 1 of the Chinese constitution. CCP holds this mandate as a blank check of their power. In addition is the top down structure of the CCP, the military kind of chain of command, and each level of command is given a part of that blank check. This system simply doesn't work. The very tenet of check and balance is lost in the system. Power is delicious and whoever gets that blank check will naturally want to hold onto it forever. This is why peopel like Chen are important to China, but only when they stay in China.
Agree with what you said on the Chinese legal system. I also see from your blog that you have a legal background, thus your concern is clearly understandable. However, I disagree with people like Chen being important to changes for China. While China is not democratic, just like in any society any change inside the country must have a general support. Activists that don't seek outside help are usually jailed & silenced; and activists that seek foreign (=West) help are viewed by the general public are traitors. You can't facilitate social changes with supposed icons who are labeled as prisoners or traitors. This is not the 1910s, China is not unstable and Western-supported dissidents have very limited influence inside China at this day and age. The only thing that will accelerate judicial change is social media and I can see that it has already helped generate a lot of ideas and talks. This is the only way. While I have high regards for activists who are genuinely concerned with human rights inside China, I feel like many of their efforts and brains could have been better utilized rather than wasting time in jail or house arrest, with almost no effect inside China.
What? Oh, boy ... People like you view Chen as a traitor because you don't understand or you dont care to undertand. He had been jailed for advocating against forced abortions, including writing appeals and staging protest for families affected. It's one thing to say China has its laws, right or wrong, but it's the other to jail those who is arguing against the laws. It's like jailing the lawyer for aruging for his/her clients. Ok, since his release from jail, he had been house arrested - make shift guards 24x7, metals to barricade his house from outside, particularly western media's contact. What kind of BS is that? Without a charge. This is all well known stuff, e.g. Christian Bale. Just google it. Now, we all know Chen has had it enough, not only the loss of freedom of him but his family, and more important, the brutalization by the local county police to his family. He alleges that he felt he was powerless to change all that because the brutalizer involved told him they are the law. Under this backdrop, Chen escaped from, as rightly put, his capitors. He debated where he should get some help to rescue his families he left behind. The only place he and his friends could think of is the US embassy, which might be able to exert some meaningful pressure to change his situation. This is far far from treason, or you don't understand what that word means. This is an outcry of helpless blindman desperately asking help, sadly not from the legal authority of China, but an outside actor like US to ensure his and his family safety infringed by peopel against him in the color of Chinese law enforcement. What a freaking embrassment to the Chinese legal system, the freaking government that proclaims as the rightful leader for the good of people.
So, what do you people have to say about the situation now? Or have your kind gone back to not giving a **** about blind chinese dudes?
Not going to length, but man, without sacrifices from people like Chen, the chit-chat on social media wouldn't carry much weight.
I think he was saying that social media works more effectivly in China than individual right advocates in isolation. On that point, sadly, I don't necessarily disagree with him, but only to the extent that works better for big issues or issue that catches everybody's eyebody, like Hanhan's copyright royalties. However, you need people like Chen to argue for individual's rights that just don't rise to the level of social attention. Try posting about a forced abortion upon a woman living in rural Shandong, none is going to give pete's **** about that, just too many of that to care about. But however such advocacy is ineffective right now, it's not the fault of the advocacy, rather the fault of the system, and at least you need vocies there so collectively they can be heard on the level of social attention, and I think that's your point, which I agree.
