White Paper on the 20th Anniversary of the June 4th 1989 Tiananmen Incident

-Democratic Forum of China 中国民主论坛:

-Abstract-

The 1989 June 4th Tiananmen Incident took place in Beijing is comprised of two components, which are the petitioning by the people and the massacre perpetrated by the government. The petition has commenced at the onset of the death of the late general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), Hu Yaobang on April 15th, and ended with the occupation of the Tiananmen Square by the People’s Liberation Army (PLA) at the expense of over ten thousands of casualties on the dawn of June 4th. The petition was lead by the students, which has come to be known also as a student movement, followed by the participation and support from the people all over the country. The petition was carried out in the manner of parade demonstration, free assembly, association, and the more extreme way of fasting in the Tiananmen Square. The petition was to appeal for a more liberal political environment, which included the rights for the freedom of the press and freedom of speech and expression, and also included anti-corruption campaign expressed in the ubiquitous slogan, “down with the official profiteers”. When the government had labeled the petition as an anti-revolutionary turbulence on as early as April 25th, the students were obliged to take up a gesture of protest in the manner of fasting in order to repeal the “turbulence” label, after the decreeing of martial law by then prime minister of the PRC state department, Li Peng on May 20th, which infuriated the people, who thereby called for the “impeachment of Li Peng” and the “repeal of marshal law” in their petition.

After the students had gone to the streets, then de facto head of the state and chairman of the military commission of the Central Committee of CCP, Deng Xiaoping, had already concluded with the imminence of a political upheaval and ordered the mobilization of PLA forces to Beijing from as early as April 25th. This has clearly demonstrated that the Chinese government had already prepared for a military crackdown on any democratic movements, and the labeling of “anti-revolutionary turbulence” was simply an excuse to carry out the crackdown.

After the marshal law was in effect on May 20th, PLA troops began to move in to Beijing. However, the troops had encountered peaceful blockades by the civilian populace. In addition, there was differences of opinion within the CCP leadership and severe criticism from the general public, the troops were held off in the Beijing suburbs and ordered for standby. When the people petitioned for an ultimate arbiter from the highest legal authority of the national government, which is the National People’s Congress and its standing committee, the government faction lead by Deng Xiaoping opted for a refusal of compromise, and had shown an unwillingness of approach within the framework of the constitution’s democratic procedure in order to resolve the people’s appeals. Instead, those hardliners were committed to deploy troops into Beijing and clear out Tiananmen Square with any necessary sacrifices by June 3rd. It was during this forceful engagement that the troops fired live bullets on ordinary civilians and resistant students, and tanks had mowed over the bodies of civilians. After the incident, the government claimed that the troops had caused hundreds of deaths of students and civilians, and inflicted injuries of thousands.

After the June 4th Tiananmen Incident, the Chinese government didn’t carry out any substantial investigations of this tragedy, on the contrary, in the face of waves of denouncements from the international community in the next twenty years, the Chinese government merely revised the incident from “turbulence” or “riot” to “a political upheaval”. On the other hand, it has consistently blocked off any information, reports, and discussions regarding the Tiananmen Incident within the country, and continues to endorse its claim on the appropriateness of its military suppression. It proclaims that “the victory of the suppression on the anti-revolutionary riots has consolidated the nation’s position on a socialist road and secured the fruits of the ten years old reform policy”. It continues to attempt to cover its crimes of a ruthless massacre with some progress made by the reform policy.

The authorities even went as far as denying the right to appeal for justice from the families of the victims of June 4th massacre. The mothers of those Tiananmen victims, (a.k.a. Tiananmen Mothers) have been calling for “truth telling, refusal to forget, a quest for justice, and an evocation of conscience” in all these years. Nevertheless, so far the government was still turning a blind eye on them, and even harassed the families trying to commemorate their lost ones from time to time.

This year marks the 20th anniversary of the June 4th 1989 Tiananmen massacre, we have devised this white paper in order to retell the truth and call for an evocation of conscience and the return of justice to the Chinese people.

First, there was simply no “turbulence” during the people’s petition in the spring of 1989 in Beijing. But the authorities had labeled the event as “turbulence” on as early as April 25th. Various historic documents have attested that from the death of Hu Yaobang on April 15th to 25th, even though there were students’ public demonstrations and free associations on the campuses, the civilians’ daily life in Beijing was orderly and peaceful, and there wasn’t even any interference with the government institutions and businesses. Demonstrations and parades are just not the standard measures for “turbulence”. However, the authority was only alleging the political appeals of the demonstration as an evidence for the occurrence of “turbulence”, and condemned the demonstrators for attempting to “denounce the CCP”. In fact, the students were only petitioning for the rights for freedom of speech and calling for anti-corruption, all of which was clearly stipulated as their rights on the existing PRC constitution. They have never explicitly opposed the CCP, nor have they called for the reform of the institutional structure of PRC constitution. But the government was afraid of the people excising their rights to engage in freedom of speech, and therefore simply labeled such gesture of petitioning for free speech as already a violation. This manifests the stark reality that the CCP’s manner was an insult and contempt of its own constitution.

Secondly, up until the beginning of June of 1989, there were no riots occurred in Beijing. There were no violent incidents, and no illegal armaments. The social order before the so-called “suppressions” by the government was stable. As to the so-called “mobs” prosecuted by the authorities after the June 4th incident, they were all civilians opposing the forceful occupation of Tiananmen Square by the PLA. Also, the authorities had never provided any hard evidences for “turbulences” before the military marched into the city, and never accused or tried any “mobs” for the alleged violence before the military was sent in to the city. On the contrary, the truth is that the fully armed PLA forces were order to forcefully invade and occupy Beijing first, and some civilians were resisting them afterwards. That is how it caused a massacre finally. Apparently, the military’s “suppression on anti-revolutionary riots” was an utter preposterous claim, and a total reversal of truth.

Again, the nature of such brutal massacre cannot be questioned. The premise was that the military’s opponents were unarmed civilians and students. They have never caused any “turbulences”, nor have they started any “riots”. They have only engaged in peaceful petitioning activities legally granted by the PRC constitution. On the other hand, the 1989 decreeing of marshal laws was also devoid of any legality or plausibility. The military’s primary responsible was to protect the nation from external forces, and defend any foreign invasions. The military cannot partake or interfere with any peaceful political disputes domestically. If absolutely needed, the troops excising marshal law had to be called in by the local government in cooperation. However, the military was mobilized toward Beijing very early on before the marshal law was even issued. This act clearly attests that the military was only a convenient apparatus of the oligarchic CCP regime to resolve any political crisis, and it is a humiliation of the Chinese military by the ruling authorities.

Finally, the issuing of marshal law was really an illegal violation, because it has never been submitted to, deliberated and approved by the standing committee of the PRC state department. The ten statutes on the rights of public demonstration from the Beijing city laws had also been largely ignored, due to the fact that the legislature of the central government at the time simply didn’t introduce any concrete laws regarding the protection or restriction on the rights of public demonstration. Therefore, the local government has no rights to restrict those basic civil rights of the people stipulated by the PRC constitution.

In the 20 years followed the June 4th incident, the areas of people’s rights for democracy and freedom has never been improved, and political prisoners had only been increased. And the petitioning for anti-corruption and “anti-official profiteering” had never been properly addressed. China today is still on the top of most corrupted society in the world. Even though the economy has gained a substantial progress under the leadership of top-down authoritarianism, we cannot allow today’s economic progress to cover up yesterday’s crimes committed by the government.

In order to avoid such massacre from happening again, the nature and truth of June 4th Tiananmen Incident has to be publicly exposed. If the PRC government is to live up to the image of a responsible and conscientious government that it says it is, then it must investigate and publicize the truth of June 4th incident, appease and reconcile with the families of the victims of the June 4th massacre, and prosecute those culprits responsible for their crimes against the people.



“六•四”天安门事件20 周年纪念白皮书

摘要



北京1989年“六•四”天安门事件包括人民的请愿和政

府的屠杀两个方面。请愿活动从前中共中央总书记胡耀邦在1989年4月15日去世之时开始，以政府当局在1989年6月4日凌晨用军队以上万人的伤亡为代价占领天安门广场为止 。人民的请愿活动以学生为先导，故又称为学潮，全国各界人士予以声援和参加。请愿活动以游行﹑集会﹑结社和在天安门广场绝食为请愿方式展开。请愿的诉求是要求宽松的政治环境及包括新闻自由在内的思想和表达自由以及“反官倒”为口号的反腐败。当政府当局在请愿早期即4月25日就将学生请愿活动定为“动乱”后，请愿的学生们以绝食来要求“摘掉动乱帽子”，在当时的国务院总理李鹏在5月20日宣布戒严后，人民又提出了“罢免李鹏”“废止戒严令”的诉求。

当时担任国家和中共中央军事委员会主席邓小平在学生们走上街头后，早在1989年4月25日就得出了北京发生了政治动乱的结论并开始向北京调动军队。这说明，中国政府当局早就准备镇压任何民主运动。所谓的“动乱”，只不过是镇压的借口。

在“5.20”戒严后，部队开始试图进入北京。可是，戒严军队遭到北京市民和平的拦截。加上中共党内的分歧和各界人民大反对，戒严部队在北京市郊区待命。当人民要求国家的最高权力机关即全国人大和其常委会来解决政治危机的时候，以邓小平为首的政府当局不愿意妥协，不愿意通过中国宪法规定的民主程序来解决人民的请愿诉求。政府决定动用军队不惜一切代价在6月3日强行进入北京和对天安门广场清场。在这个过程中，军队对普通的市民和抵抗的市民开火，坦克也向人民的身体碾过去。政府事后声称军队造成几百人的学生和市民的死亡，受伤的平民达上千人。军队坦克甚至从平民的身体上压过。

北京“六•四”屠杀后，中国当局对时间不做进一步任何调查。在世界人民的谴责之前，二十年来，中国当局一方面将“ 动乱”和“暴乱”改称“政治风波”同时对国内封锁对“六•四”天安门屠杀的报道和讨论，另一方面坚持“平暴”的正确性，声称“平息动乱和反革命暴乱的胜利，巩固了我国的社会主义阵地和十年 改革开放的成果”，试图以改革开放的一些进步来掩盖其军事屠杀的非正义性。

中国当局长期以来甚至不让“六•四”屠杀中受害者的家属需求正义。天安门受难者的母亲们（天安门母亲）多年来一直呼吁“说出真相 拒绝遗忘 寻求正义 呼唤良知”。可是当置之不理，甚至干扰她们悼念他们的亲人。

在“六•四”屠杀20周年纪念之际，我们在这里用白皮书的方式来说出真相以呼唤良知和寻求正义。

首先，北京在1989年春夏之交发生了人民的请愿活动，没有发生“动乱”。当局是在4月25日宣布“动乱”的。史料表明，从4月15日胡耀邦去世到4月25日止，虽然发生了游行示威和学校的结社活动，北京人民的日常生活秩序良好，国家机关和企业的工作没有受到影响。游行示威本身不是动乱的标准。当局只是用游行示威活动的政治诉求来确定是否发生“动乱”，指责他们企图“否定共产党”。其实，当初学生们只是要求在中国宪法范围内的言论自由和反腐败。他们没有提出反对共产党或改变中国宪法制度的要求。可是当局害怕人民享有言论自由，所以将要求这种自由的请愿活动定为动乱。当局本身是对宪法的践踏。

其次，1989年6月初北京没有发生任何暴乱。北京当时没有发生暴力事件，没有非法武装。北京在所谓的“平暴”前社会秩序良好。从当局事后对所谓“暴徒”的审判来看，所有的“暴徒”都是对军队强行进入的抵抗者。当局没有提出任何在军队进京之前发生“暴乱”的证据，也没有控告和审判在军队强行进入北京之前实施暴力的“暴徒”。真相是全副武装的军队强行进入北京在前，人民的抵抗在后。屠杀就是这样发生的。可见，军队“平息反革命暴乱”完全是倒因为果， 颠倒是非。

再次，屠杀的性质不容置疑。首先，军队的对手是非武装的平民和学生。他们没有搞动乱，更没有搞“暴乱”。他们在进行宪法允许范围内的和平请愿活动。1989年军队参加戒严本身也缺乏合理性和合法性。军队的职责主要是对外的，抵御侵略。军队不能参与或干预国内和平的政治斗争。如有必要，军队参与戒严也是应政府之邀参与协助工作。可是中国的军队早在宣布戒严前就往北京调动了。军队实际上成为中国的政治军事寡头的解决政治危机的工具。这是中国当局给中国军人的脸上涂上的耻辱。

最后，北京的戒严法是非法之举，因为它没有依法经过国务院常务委员会讨论和通过。北京市的限制人民游行示威自由的“十条”也是越权无效，因为当时中国的立法机关还没有制定关于如何保护或限制人民游行示威自由的法律。中国的地方性法规没有可以直接限制宪法规定的人民基本自由权利的权限。

“六•四”事件20年来，人民在民主自由权利方面得到任何进步。政治犯是越关越多。当初人民“反官倒”反腐败的请愿要求也没有得到落实。今天的中国社会的腐败程度仍是世界之先。中国的经济在权威政治之下有了发展。然而，今天的经济发展不能抹煞政府昨日的罪行。

为了避免这种屠杀，“六•四”大屠杀的性质必须公诸于众。政府，如果是负责任和具有道义的政府，必须调查和公布“六•四”真相，安抚“六•四”屠杀的死难者和他们的家属，请追究当事人的责任。