30 Years On - Tiananmen and Apologies

We are reaching the 30th year anniversary of the Tiananmen Square protests and subsequent crackdowns. Just a day ago, Chinese Defence Minister Wei Fenghe asserted at the Shangri-La Defence Dialogue that Tiananmen "was a political turbulence and the central government took measures to stop the turbulence, which is a correct policy". I could not disagree more.

Did I expect Wei Fenghe to admit that the communist party made a mistake in 1989? Not really, no. Perhaps an appropriate theme song for the Chinese government would be Frank Sinatra's "My Way". Where the Chinese Communist Party incredibly pulled millions out of poverty and transformed a nation by crafting a unique strategy drawing on the strengths and successes of different nations, credit must be given since credit is due. Yet, together with the desire for a better standard of living came a craving for greater dialogue and liberty. The CCP cannot call such a desire, or any desire that contradicts Party priorities, turbulence. Without excusing the CCP for an inexcusable violence, the Tiananmen incident must be understood with more nuance which I hope to shortly provide.

First, a word about apologies. Some say that apologies are deeply rooted in culture and thus Asians apologise considerably less than Westerners. The first half of the statement is true while the second half is false. After surveying U.S. and Japanese undergraduate students, a Harvard Business Review publication reports U.S. students apologising an average of 4.51 times per week compared to Japanese students' 11.05 times per week. More importantly, however, is in the way each culture understands what an apology means. For Americans, apologies establish personal responsibility, while Chinese apologies focus on the larger consequences of past mistakes.

The truth is there is a whole argument to be made about apologies. Some historical examples include apologies made by Ronald Reagan to Japanese-Americans held in US WWII internment camps and the UK's posthumous apology to Alan Turing, renowned codebreaker who prosecuted, persecuted, and chemically castrated for being gay. Yet apologies are more than just an "I'm sorry". They must be accompanied by meaningful redress. In this sense, Justin Trudeau's numerous apologies are a good step to forward, yes, but do not go far enough. In a political sense, apologies are not only sentiment, but must include a degree of ethical consideration as well as tangible costs.

Arizona Relocation Camp for Japanese-Americans by Hikaru

Costs not only influence whether a perpetrator decides to issue an apology but also affects whether a victim decides to seek redress. This interaction could be observed in the lack of U.S. apology for its 1970-1973 bombing of Cambodia or subsequent support of the Khmer Rouge but from Cambodia not pursuing official compensation. This same relationship is also present in Sino-Japanese relations surrounding the 1937-1938 Nanjing Massacre. The Rape of Nanjing was suppressed for decades post-WWII as China courted Japanese cooperation, with China only demanding an apology from in 1980 when its payoff matrix was altered. Sometimes apologies are given when they should not be. Sometimes apologies are not given when they should. Apologies given when they should be might also be given at the wrong time and in the wrong way. Indeed apologies, especially in the political arena, are complicated affairs.

Back to the Tiananmen era. The economic success that China has become cannot be an excuse to justify the brutal suppression and killing in 1989. The positive liberation since the late 1970s after the arrests of the "Gang of Four" (Mao Zedong's radical inner circle) did not eradicate the self-seeking nature held by some Chinese politicians during that time. Yet, the lack of Western democracy then and now does not mean there is a dearth of Chinese communist leaders truly fighting to represent the people or that it is indeed less effective at representing the people than a democracy would.

Do I believe any authoritarian government will be able to effectively manage an economy or a country in the long run? No. Particularly worrying to me now is Xi's slant towards increased state control and consolidation of power. Yet while I am for democracy, I am against the imposition of a Western-style democracy or structure that ignores the unique history of each nation. Numerous nations, including but not limited to Haiti and Afghanistan, are testaments to the reality that a push for democracy that ignores country-specific circumstances is dangerous.

Yet, while I mourn the carnage of the Tiananmen incident, it must be noted what the student demonstration was calling for. The students protesting were pushing for a democracy exclusive to the educated. Indeed the students of the day, or at least a subset who were the force behind the original movement, were ‘horrified at the suggestion that truly popular elections would have to include peasants, who would certainly outvote educated people like themselves’. In other words, democracy would have been dominated by the educated elite against the working population of China. And so while I condemn the CCP's response, I cannot find myself supporting what the movement truly stood for. Such an exclusive right to liberty is not a democratic idea that should be celebrated.

A misconception held is that China is completely devoid of democracy. Two key pieces of legislation has ensured that from the county-level and below, representatives are directly chosen via a general election. These elections enjoy a high voter turnout rate, general satisfaction toward the elected official compared to non-elected leaders, and stronger sense of accountability from the elected leader to the citizens instead to the party. What this experiment shows, however, is that the spreading of democracy to the upper-levels of government has the potential to strengthen synergies between the people and the government.

Deng Pufang, son of reformer Deng Xiaoping said that “reform and opening up is the liberation of people. It encourages the recognition of people’s desire and pursuit of a happy life, it stimulates the wisdom and strength of the masses, and it provides opportunities and platforms for every ordinary person to improve their lives and change their destiny”. Despite the linear logic in this statement, I do wish for the day when people of all nations will be free with the wisdom and strength to improve not just their lives, but to better the lives of those around them.