A Look at the Tiananmen Square Massacre's Brutal History
 |
| BBC News |
How did the protests grow?In spring 1989, the protests grew, with demands for greater political freedom.Protesters were spurred on by the death of a leading politician, Hu Yaobang, who had overseen some of the economic and political changes.He had been pushed out of a top position in the party by political opponents two years earlier.Tens of thousands gathered on the day of Hu's funeral, in April, calling for greater freedom of speech and less censorship.In the following weeks, protesters gathered in Tiananmen Square, with numbers estimated to be up to one million at their largest.
The protests started on April 15, 1989. Students were given ample time to withdraw. However, withdrawal was anything. These students wanted to be heard. That's what survivors of the massacre have been saying. If we look at Hu's biography, the Britannica offers these details as to why he was a beloved figure, and why his death led to the protests:
As general secretary of the CCP, Hu was responsible for ensuring that the party apparatus carried out the policy directives of China’s new leadership. He set about downgrading the party’s discredited Maoist ideology and replacing it with a more flexible and pragmatic policy of “seeking truth from facts.” In line with the new emphasis on collective leadership in place of the personality cult of Mao Zedong, and to prevent a recurrence of the kind of party domination that Mao had exercised as its chairman, Hu helped abolish that post at a party congress in 1982. He then oversaw the purging of unrepentant Maoists and corrupt or incompetent members from the party and their replacement with younger, better-educated cadres in the mid-1980s. Early in 1987, after several weeks of student demonstrations demanding greater Western-style freedom, Hu was forced to resign for “mistakes on major issues of political policy.” He nevertheless remained a member of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau. His death in April 1989 sparked a series of demonstrations led by students and others (the Tiananmen Square incident) that culminated on the night of June 3–4 with the forceful suppression of demonstrators at Tiananmen Square in Beijing and elsewhere in the country.
Obviously, the freedom of information that hit China during Deng Xiaoping's rise can't be underestimated. Deng saw a new China but he would also be stuck in controversy. What happened before the inevitable massacre on June 4? Here are some details:
At first, the government took no direct action against the protesters.
Party officials disagreed on how to respond, some backing concessions, others wanting to take a harder line.
The hardliners won the debate, and in the last two weeks of May, martial law was declared in Beijing.
On 3 to 4 June, troops began to move towards Tiananmen Square, opening fire, crushing and arresting protesters to regain control of the area.
The Chinese Communists argued among themselves on what to do. Would they want to use excessive force or not? This protest would last longer than the EDSA 1986 Revolution, all before the Chinese military showed that not all peaceful protests would work. Time Magazine gives six facts to know about the incident. However, I'll just share the last three which would serve the purpose of this entry:
When the military opened fire, a lopsided battle ensued
In the early hours of June 4, 50 trucks and as many as 10,000 troops rumbled into the streets, TIME reported just days later. The military overwhelmed the civilians and began firing into crowds, but some protesters held fast, throwing rocks and Molotov cocktails. In some cases, they responded with deadly violence: Demonstrators reportedly beat two soldiers to death who had been seen killing a civilian. In another instance, protesters covered an armored personnel carrier in banners and then set the vehicle ablaze, trapping the crew of eight or nine soldiers. The military continued its onslaught and skirmishes lasted throughout the morning, “but by then the great, peaceful dream for democracy had become a horrible nightmare.” A doctor at the time said at least 500 were dead; a radio announcer said 1,000.
A goddess lived and died
A few days before the raid on the square, “in a flash of exuberance” as TIME wrote at the time, the protesters erected a “Goddess of Democracy” that partially resembled the Statue of Liberty. The 30-foot statue swiftly made from Styrofoam and plaster became a symbolic monument to the pro-democracy movement, and was intended to be large enough to be difficult or at least embarrassing for authorities to take down. Tanks crushed her when troops took the square, TIME reported.
The Tank Man was and still is anonymous
“Almost certainly he was seen in his moment of self-transcendence by more people than ever laid eyes on Winston Churchill, Albert Einstein and James Joyce combined,” essayist Pico Iyer wrote in TIME about Tank Man, the nameless individual who was pictured stopping a column of tanks on June 5, a day after the massacre. The man was ultimately hustled to safety by fellow protesters and quite lost to the crowd. Only rumors of his identity persist, and when Chinese leader Jiang Zermin was asked a year later if he know what had happened to the young man, he responded: “I think never killed.”
Did the students really intend to attack the capital or not? Did the two soldiers who got beaten up to death kill an armed civilian or an unarmed civilian? Since there were Molotov cocktails on the site, it seems the students were willing to use violence if ever they wouldn't be heard. An alternative explanation might be that the Molotov cocktails used were most likely for self-defense. It might be the call to use force only for self-defense.
Dong Shengkun was a 29-year-old factory worker at that time. It should be interesting he cites this one:
“I saw a few students were trying to climb over the fence and evacuate from the square, and a tank went straight there and crushed them to death,” Dong said.
One can say it's an extremely lopsided battle. Couldn't the military just arrest the students trying to escape instead of crushing them to death? Chinese Defense Minister Wei Fenghe even defended the military's actions last June 3, 2019. It may be five years from then but it's not safe to let the Chinese people forget it.
Weeks of protests the Chinese capital saw hundreds of thousands of protesters – mainly idealistic young students – demanding more democracy in the Communist ruled country.
But despite the world-wide condemnation of the massacre, Wei justified the brutal crackdown, in what was a rare official mention of the events.
"How can we say that China didn't handle that Tiananmen incident appropriately?,” said Wei.
“There is a conclusion of that incident, that incident was political turbulence and the central government took measures to stop the turbulence, which is a correct policy.”
Wei was asked about Tiananmen after making a speech in Singapore.
He echoed the official position which emphasises the rapid development of China and the raising of ordinary citizen’s living standards in the years after the massacre.
"The past 30 years have proven that China has undergone major changes," he said.
Due to the government's action at that time "China has enjoyed stability and development".
Since the massacre, China has sought to avoid discussion about what happened.
If the students were causing trouble, the military response would still be considered excessive. Shouldn't the use of water cannons and tear gas be a better alternative instead of wasting people's lives, lives that can never return?
