[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 155 (2009), Part 10]
[Senate]
[Pages 13682-13683]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




                      REMEMBERING TIANANMEN SQUARE

  Mr. KAUFMAN. Mr. President, tomorrow marks 20 years since China's 
crackdown on democracy advocates in Tiananmen Square that resulted in 
an estimated 700 deaths of innocent civilians. Unfortunately, this 
represents a mere estimate of the senseless loss of life because the 
Chinese government has not been transparent in disclosing what happened 
at Tiananmen Square, and has actively suppressed reporters, protestors, 
and medical personnel who may have provided a firsthand account. Twenty 
years later, this suppression continues in the form of government-led 
crack downs on New Media sources, such as blogs, Twitter, and social 
networking sites including Facebook, where state censors target 
internet service providers in an attempt to control the free flow of 
information.
  As we solemnly mark 20 years since Tiananmen Square, it is critical 
to highlight the ongoing limitations on human rights and freedom of the 
press in China. This Tuesday, a column was published in the Washington 
Post by Dan Southerland, the former China bureau chief, which did just 
that. I ask unanimous consent that this important editorial be printed 
in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was orderd to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                      Tiananmen: Days to Remember

       Two years ago I met a Chinese student who was entering 
     graduate school in the United

[[Page 13683]]

     States. I told her I had been in Beijing during ``6-4,'' the 
     Chinese shorthand for the massacre of June 4, 1989.
       ``What are you talking about?'' she asked.
       At first I thought she might not have understood my 
     Chinese, but it soon became clear that ``June 4'' meant 
     nothing to her. I probably shouldn't have been surprised.
       In the 20 years since that day in 1989 when Chinese troops 
     opened fire on unarmed civilians near Tiananmen Square, 
     Chinese censors have managed to erase all mention of that 
     tragedy from the country's textbooks and state-run media.
       But for me, Tiananmen is impossible to forget. As Beijing 
     bureau chief for The Post, I covered the student 
     demonstrations that began in mid-April, tried to track a 
     murky power struggle among top Chinese leaders and managed a 
     small team of young, Chinese-speaking American reporters.
       What I remember best was the sudden openness of many 
     Beijing citizens of all professions. They were inspired by 
     throngs of students calling for political reform, media 
     freedom and an end to ``official profiteering.''
       People I believed to be Communist Party supporters were 
     suddenly telling me what they really thought. Some who had 
     been silent in the past even debated politics on street 
     corners. In early May, Chinese journalists petitioned for the 
     right to report openly on the Tiananmen protests, which on 
     May 17 swelled to more than a million people marching in the 
     capital. Journalists from all the leading Chinese newspapers, 
     including the People's Daily, the mouthpiece of the Communist 
     Party, joined in. Their slogan was ``Don't force us to lie.''
       For a brief period, Chinese journalists were allowed to 
     report objectively on the student protests. But this press 
     freedom was short-lived and ended May 20 with the imposition 
     of martial law and the entry of the People's Liberation Army 
     into Beijing.
       At first, Beijing residents manning makeshift barriers 
     blocked the troops. But late on the evening of June 3, tanks, 
     armored personnel carriers and soldiers firing automatic 
     weapons broke through to the square.
       The death toll quickly became a taboo subject for Chinese 
     media.
       Chinese doctors and nurses who had openly sided with 
     students on the square, and who had allowed reporters into 
     operating rooms to view the wounded, came under pressure to 
     conceal casualty figures.
       One brave doctor at a hospital not far from Tiananmen 
     Square led me and a colleague to a makeshift morgue, where we 
     saw some 20 bullet-riddled bodies laid out on a cement floor. 
     I later learned that the doctor was ``disciplined'' for 
     allowing us to view that scene.
       A Chinese journalist I considered a friend tried to 
     convince me that government estimates of fewer than 300 
     killed were correct and that these included a large number of 
     military and police casualties. I later learned from 
     colleagues of his that this journalist was working for state 
     security.
       After comparing notes with others, my guess was that the 
     actual death toll was at least 700, and that most of those 
     killed were ordinary Beijing residents.
       It's almost incredible that the Chinese government has 
     succeeded for so long in covering up a tragedy of this 
     magnitude.
       But for those who closely monitor the continued repression 
     of civil liberties in China--and the government's 
     stranglehold on news deemed ``sensitive''--it's not 
     surprising.
       Chinese authorities continue to intimidate reporters, block 
     Web sites and jam broadcasts of outside news organizations. 
     China is the world's leading jailer of journalists and cyber-
     dissidents. Chinese youths are among the most Web-savvy in 
     the world. But Chinese search engines, chat and blog 
     applications, as well as Internet service providers, are 
     equipped with filters that block out certain keywords 
     incorporated in a blacklist that is continually updated.
       China's censorship is multipronged, sometimes heavy-handed 
     and sometimes sophisticated, allowing debate on some issues 
     and shutting it down on others, such as Tiananmen.
       Censors hold online service providers and Internet cafe 
     owners responsible for the content that users read and post. 
     A small blogging service will usually err on the side of 
     caution rather than lose its license because of a debate 
     about June 4.
       Lines that cannot be crossed shift from time to time, 
     leaving citizens uncertain and therefore prone to self-
     censorship.
       The good news is that the blackout isn't complete. We know 
     from Radio Free Asia's call-in shows that some younger 
     Chinese know just enough about Tiananmen to want to learn 
     more. I work with several Chinese broadcasters who were 
     students in Beijing on June 4. Many of them saw more than I 
     did. And they are here to remind me--and many Chinese--of a 
     history we should never forget.

                          ____________________