12 Apr 2024 | Asia and Pacific, China, Hong Kong, News and features
This article first appeared in volume 53, issue 1 of Index on Censorship, The long reach: How authoritarian countries are silencing critics abroad, which was published in April 2024.
Zhou Fengsuo, Tiananmen protest leader, and Nathan Law, one of the faces of Hong Kong’s democracy movement, are high-profile and not afforded anonymity, something which means they are doubly exposed through being so recognised. But their fame can shield them to an extent too. Other overseas targets of Beijing who are less well-known can be just as ruthlessly pursued without an international community having their back. Ultimately their stories, which overlap, speak of just what dissidents suffer and often suffer silently.
Zhou Fengsuo
I was a student leader in Tiananmen because I wanted to do my duty for the country. I was proud of what I did, knowing that I had done so much to help facilitate the movement for a peaceful transition of China into a freer and more democratic China. But for this I was put on the most wanted list after the massacre. I was in position number five. From then on my life took on a different tune. I was arrested and put in a high-security jail in Beijing for a year and had my passport denied for five years. As soon as I got it I left China for the USA. It was January 1995.
The transition to the USA was not problem free, even from the start. I went to business school and got an MBA with honours and became a financial professional. Initially I was very relaxed but soon I realised I was very isolated from the ordinary Chinese community here. It seemed I bore a mark on my head wherever I went. People didn’t want to get close to me. Worse still, employers avoided me. Most of my friends at business school who were from China got jobs easily, but I couldn’t, even though my grades were really good. Wall Street banks were very concerned about the political risks of socialising with people like me. I was told by a Human Resources manager that the most high-profile female leader from 1989 Chai Ling was denied a job opportunity in New York because the Chairman of the Asian branch of the investment bank that offered her a job objected vehemently.
There was one incident that happened when I was in business school that also really alarmed me. In the spring of 1998 I met Wang Bingzhang, the most famous Chinese dissident. A few months later my family called and mentioned this meeting. They knew about it and what we’d talked about. Wang, who has been serving life in prison in China since 2002, must have been monitored. So it was a warning to me. The MSS [China’s Ministry of State Security) was telling me that even though I was in the USA they could still keep a close eye.
Still, I was largely oblivious to safety concerns in the early days and I continued my activism, including cofounding my own humanitarian organisation to support political prisoners in China.
The worst moment for me was in 2008. That year, when the Beijing Olympics happened, was the peak of China business. In San Francisco when the Olympic torch was passing by, we were beaten very brutally by CCP supporters. It was probably the largest gathering of CCP supporters on US soil ever – there were over 100,000 supporters, compared to just a handful of us protesters – and they really attacked us physically. I asked police to protect us, but they just shrugged and watched. This was the worst moment. I was surrounded by so many angry, impassioned CCP supporters. I believe they were ready to kill us. Their hatred of people like us was visceral. My friend Guo Ping was bleeding from an attack on the back of his head that could have been fatal.
Later I called all the major papers and TV stations in the United States about it but nobody responded.
Since Xi Jinping came to power it has become way more aggressive both on the ground and online. Even though I didn’t experience anything like what happened in 2008 again, I have known many attacks here, especially the attacks on the Hong Kong community in 2019. They were very extensive and well-organised. I wasn’t at the protests in San Francisco last November when Xi visited for the APEC summit. Once again protesters were attacked by CCP followers. Once again we published a report on it because we knew it wouldn’t otherwise be covered.
In 2018, after I organised a protest against Xi as leader for life, someone came to my house and used a big camera to take pictures, knowing I was inside. I realised this was a warning and also they are not trying to hide at all. It’s much more brazen and well-organised. Xi Jinping’s message is to go strong and to go after critics aboard.
They have become very sophisticated in how they threaten us. They gather all information on us that they can from publicly available sources. We know our organisation has everything closely examined by CCP. They scooped up all my personal information online too and organised a massive slandering and intimidation campaign against me on social media. My organisation’s public filings were used to harass us and to disrupt our work.
I even heard from a good source who was told the CCP would use US law and the US legal system to go after them. In FBI reported cases of the CCP spying on dissidents, tax records are often sought as a way to intimidate and coerce people and organisations.
Since 2020 US law enforcement has started to take action against those perpetrators of transnational repression and Congress is more aware too. But overall the CCP’s influence remains strong and pervasive in all areas of life. We will not be daunted. We will fight to be free, not to be silenced by fear.
Nathan Law
In June 2020, I made the difficult decision to leave Hong Kong. As a former protest leader and legislator, my outspoken criticism of Beijing had effectively painted a target on my back. The ramification of being a high-profile dissident became clear in August when the Hong Kong police, enforcing the draconian national security law newly imposed, issued arrest warrants for six democracy activists living abroad, myself included. The situation escalated in July 2023, when a bounty of 1 million Hong Kong dollars was placed on me, underscoring the lengths to which Beijing is willing to go to silence its critics beyond its borders. This pursuit is a testament to the concept of transnational repression, where authoritarian regimes extend their reach across the globe to target dissidents.
I was granted asylum in the United Kingdom in April 2021, but the threats from the Chinese Communist Party loomed large. I moved four times in the first year, living a discrete life, and had to be aware of my surroundings constantly to avoid tailing. The extended reach of the CCP was further highlighted when a UK-based anonymous group of Chinese overseas offered a reward for information about my whereabouts. I was not sure whether anyone offered them any intelligence – but the fact that they are so blatantly threatening exiled activists shows the CCP’s arrogance and aggression. As a result, I was always in doubt when connecting with new individuals because they could approach me with ulterior motives.
The repercussions of my activism were not limited to just myself. To frighten me, my family was subjected to interrogation by the Hong Kong police under false pretences of supporting my work financially. This baseless harassment aimed to inflict guilt and fear, leveraging collateral damage to the well-being of my loved ones. They were extremely bothered and scared. Friends in Hong Kong who were close to them told me this in secret.
The threats extend into the digital realm, where Beijing’s vast online propaganda machine orchestrates campaigns of vilification against its critics. Death threats and doxxing are part of the harassment I face, a constant reminder of the risks that come with dissent.
Escaping the grasp of an authoritarian regime is just the beginning of an ongoing struggle for freedom. The incidents of transnational repression are a reminder that the fight against autocracy doesn’t end at the border. It’s imperative for host countries of political refugees to recognise the sophisticated tactics of authoritarian regimes and ensure the safety of exiled activists. Their continued activism is vital, not just for their home countries, but as a beacon for democratic values worldwide.
Nathan Law attends a candle-lit vigil organised outside the Chinese Embassy in London in memory of those who died in the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre.
Photo by SOPA Images Limited/Alamy
7 Jun 2023 | China, News and features
As always the Chinese authorities cracked down on public commemorations of the 1989 Tiananmen Square massacre, which occurred 34 years ago last Sunday. As always more things were added to the list of what cannot be said in the lead-up. And as always people got creative in their response to getting round the censorship. Here’s a roundup of what happened recently for the anniversary Beijing would rather we all forgot.
White candles not welcome
Armoured police vehicles were deployed and hundreds of police conducted stop and search operations near Victoria Park in Hong Kong, where vigils for the victims of the massacre had previously been held for decades. The UN were “alarmed” that 23 people were arrested on Sunday for “breaching the peace”, including a veteran activist knows as “Grandma Wong”. A solitary elderly man who held a candle on a street corner was also reported to have been arrested. Commemorations of the event have become increasingly off-limits in the city state since China imposed a sweeping national security law in 2020. Still, Twitter was filled with images of people lighting candles from the relative safety of their own homes in Hong Kong.
Don’t mention Sitong Bridge
Words or symbols that reference the massacre are notoriously scrubbed from the internet by the Chinese authorities. Last week, this censorship extended to the Sitong Bridge in Beijing, when Chinese language online searches of the bridge yielded no results. It comes after a banner was unfurled on the bridge in 2022 calling for the removal of Chinese president Xi Jinping. A Weibo post by the British Embassy in Beijing showing how the Chinese state media originally reported the massacre (namely in more detail than the silence now, with state media making reference to mass casualties in hospital at the time) was removed by the authorities. The anniversary is sometimes known as “internet maintenance day” because of the number of websites taken offline.
Literary pursuits
In the weeks building up to the anniversary, it was reported that books and videos about the massacre were pulled from Hong Kong public libraries, after government auditors requested works that were “manifestly contrary” to national security be taken away. Wio News reported in mid-May that searches of library archives involving keywords on the massacre turned up no articles or references.
Tiananmen Square surveilled
No shocker here, but worth saying nonetheless – any form of rally or protest was absent at Tiananmen Square in Beijing on Sunday due to additional security checks in the area. Pedestrians on Changan Avenue, running north of the square, were stopped and forced to present identification. Journalists were also told they need special permission to be in the area.
New York new museum
A new museum dedicated to the Tiananmen Square massacre opened on Friday in New York. Zhou Fengsuo, who opened the exhibit as part of the 4th June Memorial Museum, felt it was needed as a pushback to the decades-long campaign by the CCP to eradicate remembrance of the massacre around the world. Despite being in the USA, there are still security fears for the museum’s workers. Speaking about how the museum will operate a visitor booking system, Wang Dan, a former student leader during the Tiananmen protests, told the Guardian: ““We cannot open the door for anyone who wants to come in because we’re really worried they [the Chinese embassy] will send somebody.”
The world remembers
Commemorations for the massacre were held around the world, including in Sydney, where speakers included exiled former diplomat Chen Yonglin, and demonstrators chanted “Free Hong Kong”. In London, hundreds gathered outside the Chinese Embassy calling for justice for the victims of the massacre, and for the release of human rights lawyer Chow Hang-Tung. Over in Taipei in Taiwan, less than a month after the seizure of Hong Kong’s “Pillar of Shame”, a statue commemorating the victims of the massacre, people gathered around a replica on Sunday as part of the city’s commemorations. Now the only place in the Chinese-speaking world to openly hold a memorial, organisers hoped to show solidarity with both Hong Kong and Chinese dissidents.
4 Jun 2021 | China, Hong Kong, Opinion, Ruth's blog
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text]
Illustration: Badiucao
32 years ago, on 4 June 1989, the world bore witness to the realities of a totalitarian regime as the Chinese Communist Party deployed the People’s Liberation Army against unarmed protestors in Tiananmen Square. We still don’t know exactly how many people were brutally murdered although best estimates are in the thousands; the crackdown that followed across China shaped the country as we know it today and continues to resonate throughout the world.
‘Tank Man’, the image that is now synonymous with the events of Tiananmen Square, which shows an unarmed man seeking to block the movement of a tank by simply standing in front of it is both awful and awe-inspiring; it affected many of us in the decades that have followed, including me.
The Tiananmen Massacre shaped both my politics and my personal values. When you are lucky enough to be born and raised in a democracy the images from Beijing, from both the protests and the aftermath, were truly beyond comprehension. I was not yet 10 years old on the day of the massacre but I can remember the image of the man and a tank vividly.
It will surprise no one to learn that I grew up in a very political household and my extraordinary mum sat me down to explain what was happening thousands of miles away and why it was so important – but all I can really remember was fear for the man who was standing in front of a tank and an overwhelming sense of his bravery.
My home was one that celebrated collective action, a home that embraced the concept of solidarity and was internationalist – the image of the Tank Man was as crucial to my understanding of the world around me as the Miners’ Strike and the Poll Tax Riots. And without realising it, it was the events of Tiananmen Square on that fateful day which cemented my commitment to equality and justice – it also for the first time made me aware of the importance of a free press and free expression and of how the actions of one person on behalf of others can change the world.
These principles of anti-censorship, of solidarity, of equality and of justice are not only my values, but they are also the values of Index on Censorship and were those of our founders. As we reflect today on the events of 1989, we will remember not only the people who were killed for demanding a level of democracy in those fateful protests, but the people of Hong Kong who for the first time will be prevented from marking the anniversary because of the National Security Law imposed by the Chinese Communist Party. We stand with them today as we stood with the protestors in Tiananmen Square.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”You may also want to read” category_id=”41669″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
3 Jun 2021 | China, Hong Kong, News and features
[vc_row][vc_column][vc_single_image image=”116835″ img_size=”full” add_caption=”yes”][vc_column_text]For 30 years in a row after the 4 June bloodshed in Beijing, Hong Kong people had turned out en masse at Victoria Park, the city’s central park, to commemorate the victims of the killings at and around Tiananmen Square in the summer of 1989.
The regular June scenes saw marked changes last year. The imminent enforcement of a national security law scheduled for 1 July 2020 and a government ban on assembly on grounds of the Covid-19 epidemic cast a long shadow over the annual vigil. Still, thousands of people came out, holding candlelights and vowing “not to forget 4 June”.
Citing social distancing rules again this year, the Police rejected the application for a march planned for 30 May and an assembly at the park on 4 June to mark the 32nd anniversary.
The Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movement in China (Alliance), an umbrella body composed of pro-democracy groups which holds the vigil every year, has announced they will not hold any event at the park in the evening of 4 June.
More than 20 democrats, including leaders of the Alliance, who took part in last year’s candlelight vigil last year, were convicted of participating in unlawful assembly. They were given jail sentences of up to 14 months.
The remaining Alliance leaders will no doubt be arrested and face at least the same charge if they turn up at the park on 4 June. Worse, they may be charged with subversion under the national security law.
Alliance leaders advised people to commemorate the victims in a safe and peaceful manner.
Media reports quoted anonymous sources close to the government warning people not to wear black clothes – a regular form of portest – and not to hold up candles at and near Victoria Park. First, they may breach the social distancing rules. Mort importantly, they may be charged with unlawful assembly if they are deemed to have the same purpose in public places.
As this article goes to press, the city is laden with an air mixed with anger and fear, persistence and helplessness.
Following the harsh sentences of democrats convicted of unlawful assembly and the enactment of the national security law, fear has swept the city. Calls for a democratic China and an end of one-party dictatorship that resonated in earlier 4 June vigils could now be deemed as subversive.
Although the majority of people still believe they are on the right side of the history of the 4 June crackdown and must persist in holding up the candle of hope, they feel helpless in stopping the government crackdown on commemorating the anniversary.
Last Wednesday, the operators of the 4 June Museum run by the Alliance closed its doors, hours after officials from the Food and Environmental Hygiene department accused it of operating as a place of public entertainment without the required licences.
The museum reopened briefly on Sunday to mark the 4 June anniversary; it may never reopen again.
Founded at the heyday of the student-led movement in 1989, the Alliance’s days are seemingly numbered. Pro-Beijing political figures and media have put more pressure on the Government to ban the Alliance on grounds that its call for an end of one-party dictatorship in its manifesto is subversive.
Its disbandment is no longer a question of if, but when.
This is not so much because the Alliance has or will pose any real threat, nor embarrassment, to the ruling Chinese Communist Party. It can be argued that the opposite is true. That it was allowed to exist has provided a real-life case study that showed the world how the policy of “one country, two systems” worked.
Except for the much-smaller scale of commemorations in Taiwan, Hong Kong had been the only place in mainland China where people were allowed to commemorate the Tiananmen massacre.
Tolerance of the communist authorities towards 4 June commemoration, and indeed a free Hong Kong, has now run out.
With hindsight, the authorities feel they were wrong to have given too much freedom to Hong Kong people. As a result of that, many, in particular young people, have kept testing Beijing’s tolerance by crossing the political “red lines”, referring to politically sensitive issues such as independence and self-determination as well as challenging the system of government and their governance.
The protracted territory-wide protests sparked by a bill on extradition in 2019, followed by a landslide victory of the democrats in the district council elections in November that year, have shocked Beijing. They responded by imposing the national security law and overhauling the election system to make sure the city is run by Beijing-trusted patriots.
With democracy scuttled and freedom curtailed, the 4 June candlelights, described by Nancy Pelosi, US House Speaker, as “a beautiful sight to behold”, may now become history, testifying the end of “one country, two systems.”[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][three_column_post title=”You may also want to read” category_id=”85″][/vc_column][/vc_row]
