I usually reserve updates to my commentaries for the annual compilation I publish in book form. Therefore, it is rather ironic that this is my second update this week. Here, in part, is what I wrote about this still-unfolding saga two days ago:
Why continue the trade embargo against Cuba but trade with China? The answer of course is obvious. But the United States is now being hoisted by its own petard over the moral hypocrisy inherent in its relationship with China. Because just last week one of China’s most famous dissidents, Chen Guangcheng, sought refuge in the U.S. embassy in Beijing.
[I]nstead of asylum, Chen is merely seeking U.S. guarantees of safety and freedom of movement as he continues his human rights crusade in China. But he is naive and sadly misguided if he thinks the United States can honor such guarantees… Now the United States must decide whether to hand him over (as China is demanding), grant him indefinite refuge (as every human rights organization is urging), or negotiate a mutually face-saving compromise worthy of King Solomon (as both countries are undoubtedly trying to do)…
[A]nalysts are also predicting a full-scale diplomatic freeze between the United States and China when Secretary of State Hillary Clinton arrives in Beijing tomorrow for previously scheduled meetings. I disagree; not least because China has always proselytized the pragmatic philosophy that human rights issues should never interfere with the conduct of business between nations.
(“Blind Dissident Seeks Refuge at U.S. Embassy in China,” The iPINIONS Journal, May 1, 2012)
Well, reports are that, after six days, Chen left the embassy today “of his own volition” to seek medical treatment at a local hospital.
He reportedly declared that he had no interest in seeking asylum; therefore, his presence must have been just a pain in the ass for the United States. Indeed, I have no doubt that embassy officials were far more eager to hand him over for treatment than Chen was to receive whatever treatment he may have needed.
Hence this hospital compromise, although hardly worthy of King Solomon, is just a way for both sides to save face. For it beggars belief that the United States did not have the means to provide comprehensive treatment at the embassy.
But everybody knows how sensitive, defensive, and reactionary China is on human rights. Therefore, it would be foolish and ironic (i.e., hypocritical given its embargo against Cuba) for the United States to jeopardize their long-established economic ties and budding geo-strategic alliances (especially with respect to North Korea and Iran) just to protect or rescue this one quixotic dissident.
Accordingly, the United States is claiming that it did not betray Chen or its values by handing him over to China, and that it will “remain engaged with Mr. Chen and his family in the days, weeks and years to come.” Whereas China is claiming that it prevailed upon the United States to hand him over and it is demanding an apology from the United States for its “interference in China’s internal affairs.”
In reality, the United States will avoid any further contact with Chen like the plague (and made a point of warning that even the temporary refuge it granted him was “exceptional” to discourage other dissidents). And China will settle for just looking tough by demanding the apology; which it knows it will never get, but this incident gives it an opportunity to shove its pro-forma defense to all claims of human rights abuses by foreigners in the face of the most powerful nation on earth.
Most important for both countries, however, is that this well-orchestrated handover allowed today’s business meetings between Secretary of State Clinton and Chinese officials to begin as scheduled without the distraction of this human rights issue.
But it’s only a matter of time before this dissident becomes a cause celebre for human rights activists around the world. And no matter attempts by the United States to wash its hands of him, his fate will continue to serve as Exhibit A for the hypocritical, transactional values that govern its relationship with China.
In fact, Chen – who, according to late-breaking reports, now wants asylum not just for himself but his whole family – is now accusing the United States of betraying not just him but its professed values: talk about being hoisted by its own petard.
Alas, pigs will fly before China allows this poor, misguided (perhaps even misled) crusader out of its sights … again; so asylum now is just a pipe dream. Moreover, here is why no country, not even the United States, will risk bilateral fallout with China over Chen:
The United States and Europe [not to mention developing countries from Asia to Latin America] are now becoming as dependent on China’s cash as they are on Mideast oil.
(“Countries Queuing Up to Become As Indebted to China As the U.S. Is,” The iPINIONS Journal, September 15, 2011)
He who pays the piper….
Related commentaries:
Blind Dissident Seeks Refuge…
Countries queuing up…
This commentary was originally published yesterday, May 2, at 6:18 pm