Why China should be open about Tiananmen attack
November 1st, 2013
06:23 PM ET

Why China should be open about Tiananmen attack

By Robert Daly, Special to CNN

Editor's note: Robert Daly is director of the Kissinger Institute on China and the United States at the Woodrow Wilson Center. The views expressed are his own.

At noon on October 28, an SUV exploded in front of Beijing's Gate of Heavenly Peace, or Tiananmen. Five people were killed and forty injured. The symbolic nature of the site, as well as the timing of the violence – China's Communist Party is about meet to set the country's direction for the next decade – make the explosion more important than a bombing would be in another Chinese city in a less sensitive season. The bus bomb that killed 16 in Wuhan in February, 1998, for example, did not get as much attention.

Not that Monday's tragedy has been widely covered in China. The site of the fire was barricaded and cleaned within hours. Chinese censors were just as thorough in scouring China's Internet for mention of what should have been the day's major story.

We will probably never know the intentions of the people in the SUV, but it appears that that this was either a murderously clumsy self-immolation or a terrorist attack. Beijing has declared that it was terrorism and has five suspects in custody who have confessed to planning it.

That this was terrorism is plausible, but it will not be credible unless Beijing provides evidence and tries any suspects tied to the attack in a transparent manner. That is unlikely – Beijing has already drawn its customary veil of silence around the incident. This penchant for secrecy makes it difficult for the U.S. and other countries to extend to China's leaders and the Chinese people the sympathy they wish for and may deserve. Instead, we answer their silence with our own.

The United States received condolences from world leaders when it was attacked in Boston, New York, and Oklahoma City. The innocents killed on Monday deserve the same attention. The area of the blast is packed at midday with thousands of Chinese tourists, many of whom have come from China's poor interior with their one child for the only trip they will ever make to the capital. For many Americans, Tiananmen is the site of the 1989 student movement and the Tank Man, but for Chinese tourists, it is a place to fly kites, slurp popsicles, and look at the gate they've seen only on television and on the backs of their coins. We should mourn them and, if their murders were planned, we should condemn their killers.

More from GPS: How Chinese censorship is reaching overseas

But we need proof. (The Chinese people need it more urgently, of course, in order to grieve properly, protect themselves from further violence, and understand their own country, but that is a different issue). We need proof to respond decently to the suffering of the victims and because China and the United States have pledged to help each other in worldwide efforts fight terror. We also need proof because we know that the 10 million Uyghurs of China's Xinjiang Autonomous Region are treated badly in their homeland and are often the first to be suspected of criminal activity in wealthy eastern cities, where they are an easily identified minority. Several Han scholars are leading the way in documenting prejudice against Uyghurs and are calling for new policies that afford them greater opportunity and respect. As an oppressed minority seeking freedom in their homeland, Uyghurs naturally elicit American sympathy.

On the other hand – the only hand, according to propaganda ministries in Beijing – there is a low-level, violent Uighur insurgency in Xinjiang. Han Chinese and Uyghurs have been killing each other in the region for years. Scores have died in tit-for-tat attacks this year, most of them reportedly Uyghurs, and over two hundred were killed on both sides in 2009. The United States has designated the East Turkestan Islamist Movement, a Uighur group, as a terrorist organization. Uyghurs were captured by American troops in Afghanistan after 9/11 and 22 were held at Guantanamo.

Beijing describes nearly all violence in Xinjiang as terrorism orchestrated outside of China by "splittists" who don't share in most Uyghurs' natural love of the motherland. Beijing's insistence that the Uyghurs have no legitimate grievances makes it hard for the U.S. to rush to China's side during the current tragedy.

Like many issues in the U.S.-China relationship, this is a multi-faceted failure on both sides. Chinese and American responses to the Beijing bombing underscore the cultural and political differences that make the United States and China wary of each other even as they pledge to build a new type of great power relationship. If that clumsy phrase is to mean anything, it should mean that we know how to speak to each other respectfully, truthfully, and effectively, even when we disagree.

It looks like that won't happen this time around. China is torn between sweeping the incident under the rug and cracking down ever more harshly on its Uighur population. The result is that, in the United States, this has become yet another story about the goonishness of the Chinese government rather than a story about human beings killed on Tiananmen. In China, our failure to take China's side will feed the established narrative of American self-regard and hypocrisy.

We could use a new type of relationship.

Post by:
Topics: China • Terrorism

soundoff (60 Responses)
  1. monitor

    911!911!911!

    November 3, 2013 at 11:04 pm | Reply
  2. chrissy

    So i see 90% of the posts on this thread are from the cnn troll!

    November 3, 2013 at 11:28 pm | Reply
  3. amber、

    Is a terrorist attack in the United States, in other countries is called a deserved it.

    November 4, 2013 at 12:58 am | Reply
  4. moniyo

    10.28 CNN in violent terrorist attacks in Beijing reports said the terrorists as worthy object of sympathy, then I can also say that in 911 cases of violent terrorist attacks is worthwhile object of sympathy!

    November 4, 2013 at 3:20 am | Reply
  5. moniyo

    U.S. may allow East Turkistan Islamic Movement, a terrorist organization like the presence in its territory and to engage in separatist terrorist attack China, I can also say that China should also allow al Qaeda attack within the United States in the world!

    November 4, 2013 at 3:34 am | Reply
  6. zick

    today, I have to confess that some american scholars are just dissemblers!

    November 4, 2013 at 5:47 am | Reply
  7. Jason Miks

    911

    November 4, 2013 at 5:48 am | Reply
  8. Simon

    Whatever that the Chinese government said ,the American never believe,because that is a communist party government.

    November 4, 2013 at 10:13 am | Reply
  9. Rick McDaniel

    When you say that............I respond..........why did Obama stop every major news network from publishing a single hate photo of the anger of the Egyptians, against Obama?????? Answer..........deception.

    November 4, 2013 at 12:43 pm | Reply
  10. Jeffrey

    Why US should be open about the 911 attack.

    For the same logic US might need to review their policy on terrorism in the past 10 years or Beijing should just make up some evidence like Mr Bush did in Iraq war.

    November 4, 2013 at 5:47 pm | Reply
  11. Maersk

    This kwok zucking writer should open his kowk zucking mouth and swallow another load of kum until he really is full of it.

    November 4, 2013 at 8:18 pm | Reply
  12. Jack Swagger

    Keep thinking in this way & We will see what the world reacts when another 911 happens. You Hypocrite!

    November 4, 2013 at 9:21 pm | Reply
  13. Jack Swagger

    'but for Chinese tourists, it is a place to fly kites, slurp popsicles, and look at the gate they've seen only on television and on the backs of their coins. " What the *? Can you hypocrite stop being so stupid and condescending? 1)No one fly kites there(too crowded), 2)we prefer ince cream,3)every Chinese can see the gate whenever they like, and 4)we don't have the gate on the backs of our coins now! I alaways wonder why a person like Robert Daly who knows nothing about China wrote so many articles about China.

    November 4, 2013 at 9:36 pm | Reply
  14. JD

    I doubt it was terrorist, if it were that the Chinese propaganda machine wouldn't hide the event and use it to their own benefit. I rather think it was a desperate attempt to use that famous square to get people aware of the plight of the minorities in Chinese Turkestan (Xinjiang) who are just as much subjugated as the Tibetans, and their lands are just as much resettled as Tibet as well.

    November 5, 2013 at 2:50 am | Reply
    • Jason

      Have you ever been to any place of China? Go and see. You will know how well Xinjiang people feel at home since past several decades. I was often asked such silly questions when I was in U.S.A.– am I safe to go to Xinjiang and Tibet? my answer is- Go and see. instead of reading newspapers just at your home

      November 5, 2013 at 6:43 am | Reply
    • mgunn

      Doubt terrorist huh? If the definition is innocent civilians killed then you are a fool, innocents were killed. If the definition is because they have legitimate grievances then the plight of the mideast thru US policy there for decades, is basically calling the Boston bombing and 911 not terrorism?? No doubt its just terrorism when done onto us but not for others.

      November 5, 2013 at 7:29 am | Reply
  15. Jason

    Traditional predudice in the VERY CNN way, Esp on China issues

    November 5, 2013 at 6:18 am | Reply
1 2

Post a comment


 

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.