October 4, 1996

Q&A

More Questions Than Answers for China's Future


Daniel Kwok is a professor of Chinese history and world history at the University of Hawaii. He also founded the China Seminar, a public discussion group in 1974, is chair and director of the Freedom Forum Asia Fellowships and is vice chair of the board of regents of Hawaii International College in Honolulu. His latest work, "Turbulent Decade, a History of the Cultural Revolution," is a translation of a history of that cataclysmic event in China by pro-democracy dissident intellectuals Yan Jiaqi and Gao Gao. Kwok was at UNL recently as part of the Thompson Forum on World Issues. His lecture focused on China at the end of the 20th century. Following is an excerpt of an interview with Kwok, conducted by Jim Ballard from the UNL Office of Public Relations.

BALLARD: Tell me a little bit about what you'll address in your talk at the Lied?


KWOK: It's not only a probe of the themes of unity and division, but it's also a look at the distance between the ideal and reality. The talk (of Chinese unity) is very much one of cultural preference, but . . . unification is often a political question. These are two very rich themes in Chinese history and I'll be breaking that down and showing how the divisions have come to China over time. Some of the divisions come from internal economic reasons and some are results of conquest.

BALLARD: Does the U.S. media give the American public an accurate portrayal of the reality in China?


KWOK: It's accurate and inaccurate. I think June 4, 1989, is still in the media's mind, when they thought "Oh, that's just a student demonstration and the government should have done this or that to quell it." People don't risk their comfort and lives to go out into the public square and say something for no reason. The fact that it happened at all shows that it exists, and that's reality. But what kind of ideal, fresh or tired, do we live on? Yet sometimes the Western media, after June 4, 1989, blamed itself for having played up or overplayed the student part. I don't think it did.

BALLARD: So you don't believe the Tiananmen incident and events since then have been sensationalized by the media?


KWOK: I think the event sensationalized itself. The Western media is very much tuned into crisis, it thrives on crisis. Gorbachev's visit and the timing from all sides was perfect for the media . . . the Eastern Europe protesters were quoting the Tiananmen experience as example for their political change. That's very interesting.

BALLARD: What are the chances of something like Tiananmen Square happening again, when there seems to be no indication of China following in the steps of what's happened recently to other Communist countries?


KWOK: Tiananmen wasn't that great a threat. It was a very unusual demonstration of an attempt at political reform. It was not an attempt at political revolution. All it asked for was for the government to clean itself up. We call it democracy, and I think the fact that people spoke up is a form of democracy, a manifestation of some democratic impulse, but it was not a political revolution. Expressions of protest for political reform will happen in China. It will probably take different forms. As you see dissidents continually being hauled in, these expressions of protest are very brave ones. That kind of thing goes on in China. As to whether they will go the way of Russia and the rest of Eastern Europe, I don't think it will be that spectacular, but change will come. With China change always comes slowly and torturously.

BALLARD: It's seems like a stalemate. The Chinese are proud of their culture and of who they are, but just don't agree with the government's ideology.


KWOK: My theme, this ideal for a cultural unity, has always been very strong. Sometimes it arches over some very discomforting realities that most Chinese tend to think about - one China, one indivisible cultural realm. Right now the nationalistic mood is very strong for a one, great China including Taiwan, Hong Kong, and all the other places. This kind of ideal has some historical manifestations, also some facts of real division of China that are economically driven. That ideal sometimes worked against division and sometimes for division. It's not that they are so uncomfortable that they are going to have a political revolution. But remember, this century China has produced three revolutions. That's political discomfort.

BALLARD: As you say that, is one single ideal even feasible with a country as large as China adding in all the Western influences?


KWOK: My preference is to let the message go through that there is no sense trying to come up with a political union as big as a cultural ideal. Why worry about that? It's too much excess baggage. Besides, the Chinese culture is not just one culture, it's many little pockets. Anthropologists will tell us that. It's an ideal that sometimes makes China's reality so difficult. I think the Chinese-speaking world could produce many political entities that would challenge the talent for political configurations, and Singapore is a good example, but it's a different polity. That's not the message, I'm not a preacher, I'm not an advocate for these ideas. I'm just a historian trying to get people to look at certain realities, play with realities so that in the public discourse we can have more to talk about.


BALLARD: How would you classify China, are they a world leader or a country in turmoil?


KWOK: It's a very big country. It's very strong in the sense that, especially with the current reform, if it sneezes the rest of the world will catch a cold. On the other hand, if you look at the leaders, they're worried about something. The whipping up of this patriotic movement, the talk about spiritual things - it's a kind of worry that politics is not following economics in the sense of the good things of economic change are not politically compensated for. They know that. And in a post Deng Xiaoping struggle for power is making use of a kind of Chinese media manipulation.

BALLARD: When Xiaoping dies, which according to who you believe may not be long, will individuals trying to make plays for power disrupt the continuity of the party?


KWOK: After Tiananmen . . . (the communist party) suffered enormously because people were just dropping out. People no longer looked to the party membership for signs of glory and so forth. They are kind of worried because they left the people behind. They have separated their politics from the people.

BALLARD: How do you think the U.S. should deal with China and vice versa?


KWOK: They have a lot in common and a lot at risk. The U.S. owes China. China has a huge foreign currency reserve, it wasn't anywhere three years ago, now it's in the first four, and Taiwan is up there, too, and this is not counting Taiwan's foreign currency reserve.
The U.S. should engage China, (and) can deal with it on many levels. The President (Clinton) should never get into the act of talking about human rights and Most Favored Nation in the same breath. There is a practical level of "business as usual" that is good for the U.S. as well as for China.

On human rights, environmental threats and so forth, (there are) many international forums. I think that is where one can be the loudest, but one must also be very straight. Our own foreign policy and internal policies should also be subject to public (scrutiny).

For instance, we say that smoking is bad for human health and violates human rights. But Marlboro sales in China are way up, there is no curb for cigarette sales to China. Now, how are we going to talk about human rights and MFN's that way? Trading is another matter. I think both can go on at the same time, but if you want to mix the two then it's bad, because in trading it's a matter of dickering and with human rights you don't dicker. When we face that fairly and squarely ourselves, I think dealing with China would be very straightforward too.

BALLARD:Then there's the matter of Hong Kong. How will that affect relations?


KWOK: The whole thing is going back when that lease expires June 30, 1997, back to the sovereignty of China. However, China has named Hong Kong a special administrative area with its own CEO, head of state. (Some people) say it will be "Hong Kong-izing China" or "Sino-fying" Hong Kong, and this is a worry. This is why I'm hoping for the best and expecting the worst, because Hong Kong has been contoured into China, all the economic factors as well as the economic practice of doing international business. Can China afford to stop that?

BALLARD: When you say, 'expecting the worst' do you say that from Hong Kong's perspective or from the U.S. perspective?


KWOK: From Hong Kong's perspective. Hong Kong has its own laws. If there is one thing about Hong Kong it's their legal clarity that could thrive. But, if China comes in and says we may or may not go with your supreme court, that one thought is very unsettling not just for Hong Kong but for the thousands of international business headquarters in Hong Kong.

But in the last few years . . . business has been pouring into China. There's a huge level of what I call overseas Chinese, the Southeast Asian Chinese, the U.S. east-coast, west-coast kind of Chinese, the Toronto Chinese businesses with great Hong Kong ties. Hong Kong is also, from another point of view, the best place to study and observe China.

Freedom of the press, however, is a real problem . . . Self-censorship is going on right now. From the point of view of the press, it's a real threat. These things are being talked about, (but not) at an official level.

Back to menu

For questions regarding these Scarlet pages, contact:
dtaurins@unlinfo.unl.edu
(402) 472-8518, Fax: (402) 472-7825