Clinton and Jiang debate on TV

The Jakarta Post's Asia correspondent Harvey Stockwin continues a series of articles on President Bill Clinton's current visit to China with a report on the exceedingly brief Jiang-Clinton summit on June 27th. He suggests that the press conference after the summit was more substantial than the summit itself.

HONG KONG (JP): In the end, the Sino-American summit meeting lasted a mere two hours out of the nine days which the huge Clinton entourage is spending within China. No major new agreements flowed from the summit, but then none were expected. The big surprise was that the Chinese people got to see and hear a live and uncensored televised debate between their President, Jiang Zemin, and the President of the United States Bill Clinton.

Gone are the days when summits were only held to consummate meaningful agreements, seriously negotiated. Given that time has to be halved for translation, the Jiang-Clinton summit lasted a mere hour. The best that could be agreed, in order to suggest that the trip was not a complete waste of taxpayers money, was a Sino-American pledge to detarget their nuclear missiles aimed at each other, and to issue a joint statement promising Sino- American collusion with regard to South Asia's nuclear developments. There was no visible or tangible advance on key Sino-American issues such as Taiwan, China's entry into the World Trade Organization, China's support for nuclear proliferation (proliferation correct) and human rights.

So, as the Stars and Stripes rang out over a deserted Tiananmen Square at the beginning of a formal welcoming ceremony, the main victory was for the Chinese communist leaders, who had thus secured a symbolic U.S. endorsement and a "renormalization" of Sino-American relations, after all the friction arising from the Beijing Massacre in June 1989. The fact that he was making a deeply controversial gesture towards China was etched on Clinton's face as he trooped the line of PLA soldiers, sailors and airmen.

After the ceremony the two Presidents went inside the Great Hall of the People at around 9.30 a.m. emerging two hours later to give a joint press conference which was probably the main "achievement" of the summit. Given the relentless Clinton pursuit of the politics of image, this image did at least have a little substance.

For the first time in many years (perhaps ever) a joint press conference with a foreign leader was apparently broadcast live (with English-Chinese, Chinese-English translations) over Chinese television. So, also for the first time, Chinese television carried a criticism of the June 1989 Beijing Massacre, as Clinton stated that "I believe, and the American people believe, that the use of force ( against the democracy demonstrations) and the tragic loss of life was wrong". Clinton had given a brief history of Tiananmen Square as a cradle of Chinese nationalism and striving for democracy.

Initial reports indicate that the telecast of the press conference was broadcast live throughout the nation. The normal Chinese practice is to hold over such broadcasts until the tape had been edited according to the party line. Sometimes live broadcasts in the Beijing area turn out not to have been carried throughout the nation.

In making arrangements for the trip, the Americans had asked for a live broadcast of a Clinton speech direct to the Chinese people, as Ronald Reagan did in 1984. The Chinese leaders have (so far) denied this request.

Conceivably the press conference transmission was a compromise offering.

Assuming these reports of the live nationwide telecast are proved correct, then the "debate" between Clinton and Jiang over 1989, and over Tibet, plus Clinton's well argued plea for greater personal freedom if China's economic development is to be successful in the 21st Century, may have done something to diminish the bitterness some, perhaps many, Chinese feel that the U.S. leader accepted and attended a Tiananmen welcoming ceremony.

There was nothing particularly new in the "debate", as President Jiang took care to reiterate China's contrary official viewpoints to those articulated by Clinton. For example, Jiang maintained that China would not enjoy today's stability if the government had not acted in 1989 in the way it did with the Beijing Massacre -- a view with which many Chinese, with their innate fear of national chaos, would agree.

What was new was the debate itself plus the fact that a few departures from the party line was actually heard on the controlled Chinese media.

There was nothing new, too, in the two references to South Asia.

First, there was a Sino-American joint statement on the nuclear issues which suggested that "our (Sino-American) shared interests in a peaceful and stable South Asia and in a strong global non-proliferation regime have been put at risk by (India's and Pakistan' nuclear) tests which we have joined in condemning".

The statement also promised that China and the U.S. "have agreed to work closely together" to promote non-proliferation in South Asia and a resolution of Indo-Pakistan differences. The joint statement promised more joint action vis-a-vis India and Pakistan, a move which was swiftly and predictably rejected by India as an attempt at Sino-American condominium and hegemony.

Essentially, the statement reflected Clinton's speech in Xian, when he talked of China as being part of the solution for South Asia, but showed no recognition whatsoever that China (given the complexities of the Sino- Indian-Pakistan triangular relationship) is actually very much part of the problem.

In the press conference, Clinton called for Sino-Tibetan dialogue while Jiang reiterated the standard Chinese view of Tibet and the Dalai Lama.

After hearing Jiang's view that the Dalai Lama must unequivocally accept both Tibet and Taiwan as part of China, Clinton made one last effective intervention "that will be unpopular with everyone".

"I have spent time with the Dalai Lama," Clinton went on, "I believe him to be an honest man, and I believe that if he had a conversation with President Jiang, they would like each other very much".

The only modest surprise from the summit was that there was an agreement on the detargeting of each others missiles at the other. Earlier, it had seemed likely that agreement would not be reached due to the Chinese insistence that there should also be a "no first use" agreement on nuclear weapons.

Since there are almost certainly many more U.S. missiles targeted on China than the 13 Chinese missiles said to be targeted on the United States, the Chinese gave way on this point, with Jiang verbally re-asserting the "no first use" policy in the press conference.

The detargeting agreement is, in any case, more symbolic than anything else since it is a relatively simple matter for missiles to be retargeted if and when a crisis arises. It can evidently be accomplished within half an hour.