Times: Following His Leader

On Falun Gong, Hong Kong's boss once again unthinkingly apes Beijing

By Sin-Ming Shaw

July 2, 2001, Vol.157 No.26

Will Hong Kong follow Beijing's lead and ban Falun Gong? The territory's leaders are sending out mixed signals. Last week, Sir Donald Tsang, head of Hong Kong's civil service, appeared to assert that the government would not outlaw the group. But his words were carefully ambiguous. And just days earlier, his boss, Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa, stood up before the territory's Legislative Council and declared: "There is no doubt Falun Gong is an [Jiang Zemin government's slanderous term omitted]." That statement has been broadly interpreted as a precursor for a tough anti-xx bill. And if such a bill is submitted, the legislature, packed with people who follow Beijing's dictates, will surely pass it, which would further damage the "One Country, Two Systems" principle through which Hong Kong is constitutionally meant to operate under its own political, economic and social systems.

Despite Tung's role as Hong Kong's top representative, when it comes to matters on which Beijing has pronounced judgment, he consistently toes the party line. In his statement, he said Hong Kong does not need new legislation "at this point" but added: "We must monitor Falun Gong very carefully." Once again, Tung seems to think patriotic behavior means echoing the wishes of China 's President Jiang Zemin, who wants Falun Gong quashed. The anti-xx arguments that Tung and his senior officials have advanced are forced and fallacious. [...]

What similarity is there between Falun Gong and Jones-town or Aum Shinrikyo? Almost none. What happened in Jonestown was mass murder, not suicide: Jim Jones misled his followers into drinking poison and 913 died. As for Aum Shinrikyo, a Japanese court has refused the government's request to ban the [group] though it has handed down death sentences to two leaders found guilty of the gas attack. The court made the distinction between violators of existing laws and citizens' constitutional freedom to practice faith, however unpopular those beliefs may be to others. To link Falun Gong with these groups is to incite hate.

Self-immolation is a shocking act. The motivation is often complex, not subject to simplistic generalization. Take the case of Thich Quang Duc. In Saigon, on June 11, 1963, the venerable 73-year-old Buddhist monk sat down in a busy intersection and had two monks pour gasoline over him. Thich lit a match, clasped his hands in prayer and burned himself to death. The horrifying dignity of his protest against government persecution stunned the world. Other monks followed in subsequent self-immolations, protesting against persistent religious suppression by the minority Catholic government in a nation with a long Buddhist past. [Editor's note: The self-immolation on Tiananmen Square has nothing to do with Falun Gong]

Would Tung have called Buddhists "[Jiang Zemin government's slanderous term omitted]" because some monks had committed self-immolation? Would he have banned Buddhism? Before answering, he and his supporters would do well to ponder the following. [Party name omitted] is as alien to China as Catholicism was to Vietnam--both are European in origin. By contrast, Falun Gong's teachings, [...], are rooted in three ancient Chinese traditions: Qigong, [...]. Those in China who still profess to believe in [party name omitted] are as small a minority a s Catholics were in Vietnam. [...] meanwhile, in its 51-year history ruling China, the [party name omitted] Party has been responsible for the death of tens of millions of innocent citizens, including its own supporters. Perhaps the [Jiang Zemin government's slanderous term omitted] is Jiang's own party.

Why does Jiang consider Falun Gong such a threat to China? It is because the country's leaders no longer have any convictions to cling to and are therefore insecure about their legitimacy. They talk [party name omitted] but act capitalist. "Flash the left indicator, turn to the right," is a popular mainland quip on hypocrisy in high places.

In my view, Deng Xiaoping promoted the One Country, Two Systems formula to allow China to become more like Hong Kong, not the other way around. If Tung, out of a misplaced sense of patriotism, enacts anti-xx legislation to please Beijing's leaders, he will be doing his country a disservice. Tsang's remarks suggest moderation but even he left open the possibility of a future ban. "We are not legislating," he said last week, a statement that covers just the present, meaning the government might shift tack at any time. That would please the ignorant and the sycophants in China and Hong Kong.

http://www.time.com/time/asia/news/magazine/0,9754,165180,00.html

SCMP: Eager-to-please Tung strikes out again [Excerpt]

Claudia Mo

Wednesday, June 27, 2001

Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa's recent statements on the Falun Gong spiritual movement and on the proposed rail-fare increases suggest he could be playing a dangerous political game. In reply to a legislator's question on June 14, Mr Tung proclaimed "after careful consideration" that, while his government was not legislating against Falun Gong, the [group] was without doubt an "[Jiang Zemin government's slanderous term omitted]". But why did Mr Tung choose to badmouth the [group] when his government had already decided to leave it alone, at least for the time being? One obvious answer is he wanted to please Beijing.

[...]

Meanwhile Chief Secretary for Administration Donald Tsang Yam-kuen, who last week told the Foreign Correspondents' Club that Mr Tung's earlier remarks on the Falun Gong were simply applying his boss's "own definition" of [Jiang Zemin government's slanderous term omitted]s, has since denied he meant to imply that the Chief Executive was just expressing his personal views on the issue. But this could be semantics, since it is unthinkable that the SAR chief could be voicing personal opinions while answering questions in the Legislative Council on domestic Hong Kong issues.

In any case, by categorically branding the Falun Gong an [Jiang Zemin government's slanderous term omitted], Mr Tung has not only made a potentially defamatory comment but also abused the privilege of immunity from legal action that he enjoys while speaking at Legco. And he has exploited the greater weight that is given to his statements when he speaks in the capacity of Hong Kong's Chief Executive.

If the Falun Gong is indeed an [Jiang Zemin government's slanderous term omitted] and the Government is not legislating against it, then that should have been enough to cause a public scare. But Hong Kong people have better sense than that - Falun Gong followers have done nothing to warrant such a reaction.

Mr Tung asked the two railway companies to "listen very carefully to the views of the population at large". He should do the same thing when it comes to religion and beliefs.

The pro-Beijing camp has publicly voiced the view that Mr Tung's re-election is not guaranteed. The Chief Executive is now trying too hard. The end result is that, sooner or later, Hong Kong will be viewed as not too different from other major Chinese cities. In other words, it is ruled not by laws and regulations but by a parochial leader who obeys Beijing's dictates.

Claudia Mo is a Hong Kong-based journalist and commentator.

http://focus.scmp.com/ZZZ7E1R7EOC.html

Category: Falun Dafa in the Media