TO LOSE one of China's celebrities-turned-fugitive—to a frantic and successful dash into an American diplomatic residence—may be regarded as a misfortune. To lose two, in the same way, looks like carelessness.
But if it was clear to American diplomats in Chengdu in February that they could not offer asylum to Chongqing's former police chief Wang Lijun, the case of blind human-rights activist Chen Guangcheng is likely to be much more complex.
America's assistant secretary of state for East Asia, Kurt Campbell, arrived in Beijing on Sunday. Still there has been no official confirmation from either the American or the Chinese side that Mr Chen is sheltering at the American embassy, as has been widely reported. Mr Campbell's arrival comes several days ahead of a long-planned visit by Hillary Clinton, America's secretary of state. Mr Chen's case seems likely to become a major issue throughout the course of her visit, as American diplomats and Chinese officials work out how to handle his custody. Mrs Clinton's visit is part of scheduled talks in the bilateral Strategic and Economic Dialogue with China (SED), a process designed to encourage broader engagement between the two sides.
Originally a product of the American Treasury Department, the SED has been accused at times of brushing human-rights issues under the carpet. Now one of China's best-known activists has landed smack on the American mat, in a way that his hosts simply cannot ignore. At a briefing for reporters on Saturday, China's vice foreign minister, Cui Tiankai, said the conference would go ahead as planned, adding “I don't think this issue will occupy much time or focus.” That sounds optimistic. This is as potentially explosive an issue as any that has come between the two sides in a long while.
A rights activist in America with close links to Chen Guangcheng says he is “100% certain” that Chen is “under American protection” in Beijing. Bob Fu, representing China Aid, an NGO based in Texas, said he has spoken with many of the activists who were involved in Mr Cheng's escape from house arrest in rural Shandong province. He says the escape was not deliberately timed to coincide with the visit of Mrs Clinton. “It was a coincidence,” Mr Fu said. “Chen had been planning his escape for months.”
According to Mr Fu, Mr Chen, who had been beaten badly by the men who were charged with guarding him, had spent days on end lying on his bed, in order to lull his minders into believing that he was in frail health. Since nearly every movement of Mr Chen's was monitored with the aid of surveillance cameras, they became used to seeing him bedridden. In this way, Mr Chen was able to trick his guards into believing that he was still asleep when in fact he had slipped into a less-monitored part of his family compound. Mr Fu said Mr Chen escaped last Sunday, April 22nd, but that the scores of local police guarding his home didn't notice his disappearance until three days later—by which time he had reached Beijing. He had been driven the 400 miles north (640km) by at least one accomplice, a fellow activist named He Peirong. Six days later, on April 28th, Mr Fu was talking on the telephone with Ms He when she abruptly said “guobao lai le [state security are here]” and the line went dead. There has been no news of her since.
Mr Fu says that he offered to help Mr Chen leave China, but that Mr Chen insisted he would “stay and resist till the end” in order to continue fighting for the rights of ordinary Chinese people. It is difficult to see how that might be possible. The hardest questions now fall to American diplomats (and their political superiors), who must decide what to do with the man. In February Mr Wang was escorted from the premises of their consulate in Chengdu into the custody of a special contingent of police from Beijing. China and America insist he left of his own will. Mr Wang has not been seen since, even as the consequences of his flight ramify within the Politburo.
The Chen Guangcheng incident is bound to put further strain on China's relationship with America. Many observers are drawing another analogy, not to Wang Lijun but to the case of Fang Lizhi, the Chinese physicist who took refuge in the American embassy after the killings near Tiananmen Square in 1989. Mr Fang, who died this month, was holed up in the embassy, unable to leave China for America, for more than a year.
(Picture credit: AFP)



Readers' comments
The Economist welcomes your views. Please stay on topic and be respectful of other readers. Review our comments policy.
Sort:
Is it just a false impression or nobody is asking why CCP still doing terrorism with its own people, censuring informations and lying on all kind of "sensible data" to the world?! I guess Chen could shot four CCP members if it was given to him a Kalashnikov or some C4. How many Chens does China want to have?!
Believe me, if the Obama continues running the U.S. economy into the ground like he has, we'll all soon be seeing a wave of AMERICAN citizens start seeking asylum in CHINESE embassies.
And now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to my Mandarin lessons...
You go to an embassy first. We'll follow you. We promise.
It's simple.
Bo Xilai attempted a coup, along with Zhou Yongkang.
Now the Hu-Xi Clique is terrorizing Bo's family as payback.
Especially like Economist icy dry sarcastic caption. Won't be surprised to see "three's a party".
I found the Chinese foreign affairs statement rather funny.
""The US method was interference in Chinese domestic affairs, and this is totally unacceptable to China. China demands that the United States apologise over this, thoroughly investigate this incident, punish those who are responsible, and give assurances that such incidents will not recur," the foreign ministry spokesman Liu Weimin added in a statement carried by Xinhua. "
Why didn't they issue such a statement when Wang Lijun went to the Consulate in February?
The nature of politics: say the right thing at the right time.
The Chinese government and the Chinese Communist Party always say things like:
"This Statement is False"
So Hu is going to decide whether the statement is true or false.
The Central Politburo.
Really, its because if they tried to pull that one with Wang Lijun, the Americans would just say what Wang Lijun told them
It is possible that I don't know all the facts but it does not appear to me that US Embassy dragged Chen into the embassy. It is refreshing though that China demands US to punish the local officials that kept Chen under house arrest, I doubt they will act on it, that could be truly construed as interference into Chinese domestic affairs;-)
That a US-funded agency planned and executed the escape of Chen can be seen from the following statement:
"It should be pointed out that Chen Guangcheng, a Chinese citizen, was taken by the U.S. side to the U.S. Embassy in Beijing via abnormal means, and the Chinese side is strongly dissatisfied with the move," Liu said.
The US simply could not find a third country to shelter Mr Chen and has finally pursuaded China to take him back.
Yes JM, everything bad that happens in China is blamed on the West everything good we can thank the CCP for. The CCP would never lie even to save face.
If you read Chinese: Chinese Foreign Ministry said Chen left the US Embassy after a 6 day stay http://international.caixin.com/2012-05-02/100386015.html
Life can never be as easy as 1-2-3.
Can it be that CCP has improved to the level that it can now tolerate Mr. Chen without house-arresting and torturing him? I do not want to hold my hopes too high now and later be disappointed.
Mr. Chen, take care.
No, me neither. The spokesman is clearly full of lies. How can anyone tell lies like he did and fall asleep at night puzzles me--I'm not a politician. The Obama administration seemed to lack the political will/courage/integrity to stand by the values it has been promoting worldwide.
We are all speculating. We do not know what happened behind closed doors.
I believe, if Mr. Chen applied for asylum, he would be granted one. That is the American way.
Thanks.
not always... American way applies only when interest of U.S. is not harmed. Helping Chen might be detrimental for U.S. on the economics front... Letting Chen go back will definitely hurt Chen in the long run. He will probably be house arrested/dissapear again when media is not focusing on him anymore
Reuters is reporting that CGC has left the US Embassy and has been taken to a medical facility for treatment where he will be reunited with his family. (Quoting from @malcolmmoore on Twitter)
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/china/2012-05/02/c_131564125.htm
"BEIJING, May 2 (Xinhua) -- China demands the U.S to apologize for a Chinese citizen's entering the U.S. Embassy in Beijing, Chinese Foreign Ministry said here Wednesday."
Huh???
This looks like CGC will remain in China after all.
According to various news reports, he was accompanied by 3 U.S. diplomats to the hospital, where he was taken to the V.I.P. section and where he has since been joined by his family. (BTW, shouldn't they do something about the broken bones his wife suffered in a beating, now that she's finally at a hospital?)
Chen says he has been told by the Chinese government that he will be able to move to a university city and be treated "like a normal citizen."
Oh, dear. Fingers are being crossed for him around the world.
Why should Chen be treated at a hospital? Was he mistreated at the American Embassy?
Me a man, and storm the US embassy like the Iranians.
there is few people in china knows about the activist chen ,because the media is strictly controlled by the government,chinese are unable to think independently ,the believe whatever the government said,the don't care about human rights,they only care about making money.
agree. the brainwashing is very successful in China.
"chinese are unable to think independently"--such bold and over-generalized derogative statement. evidence? ;)
An inability to innovate new technology may be a good starting point.
I have to say you must know few Chinese and few knowledge of China.In the contrast,I guess those only know China from western media can not think independently about this case or other things related with China.
hahah touche.
中国人不是你认为是被洗脑的,最多的时候是无奈
@ Justin Lin
The CPC actually runs a very poor economic system, because the CPC sponsors too many state projects which reduces productivity and efficiency by reducing or eliminating competition from multiple (usually private) firms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity
Most economists agree that the perfect economic system consist of zero corruption, perfect transparency, and 100% free competition from either private or government firms. But since in the real word does not have zero corruption and perfect transparency, then occasionally government needs to step in to correct imbalances. (eg socialized medicine or subsidized schools) The problem is that the CPC takes these state projects way too far which greatly reduces productivity rather than increase it (like the Taiwanese socialized medicine system does).
You might think China is doing well growing at 8-10% a year, but really if it can implement an independent and fair judiciary and install a liberal free market economic system (eg the Swiss model or the Romney Massachusetts model), then it has the fundamentals and potential to grow at ~15% a year.
Short of reading an economics textbook or research paper, the last 75% of this book does a great job at explaining state monopolistic productivity vs private competition productivity. The first 25% is mostly American chest thumping, but the last 75% reads like a McKinsey research report concerning state monopolies vs private competition.
http://www.amazon.com/No-Apology-Believe-Mitt-Romney/dp/B0055X6EPW/ref=s...
BTW North Koreans also believe that their Great Leader is bringing economic prosperity to North Korea via his numerous state-sponsored monopolistic projects, and look at where North Korea is today.
Even without a perfect economic system, the Chinese economy is doing much better than any other economy. Will this trend suddenly change or will it continue?
@Dumb Smelly Indian
In economic field,there is no such thing as zero corruption,it does not exist.
What does exist are Corruption and Legalised corruption,in Singapore it is called Leegalised corruption as the leaders have been and is now a LEE.
The Chinese economy "is doing much better" than any other economy because the fundamentals of the Chinese economy is much better than those of every developed countries' economies. (India and other many other poor countries also have great fundamentals, but they screw things up for themselves so bad, much worse than China does to itself, that they are not growing as quickly as China.)
China could very well become a superpower eventually using its current economic system, but if the KMT had won over the CPC, then China would have already surpassed America as the world's preeminent power as early as the 1970s-1980s. If China had Taiwan's level of GDP per capita, then it would account for 60% of global GDP today.
Hence why (I've already explained this in the first post) some state programs (eg socialized medicine and free schools) are needed to correct these corruptions. The point is that the CPC goes way too far with its state programs. If the CPC adopted the SG model, then China would be growing much faster.
Does it make much of a difference that the Chinese economy exceeds that of the USA in 2020 instead of in 1990?
I suppose that the fundamentals of the Chinese economy are created by the Chinese economy and that they are much better than the fundamentals of the economies of other countries despite all.
"Does it make much of a difference that the Chinese economy exceeds that of the USA in 2020 instead of in 1990?"
Does it make much difference if you are 3x richer than you are now. (GDP per capita) Who cares about GDP per capita as long as 1.3 billion people are in aggregate richer than 300 million people right?
"I suppose that the fundamentals of the Chinese economy are created by the Chinese economy"
No actually the fundamentals are created mostly by demographics and access to natural resources.
In addition to demography and access to natural resources there are othervfactors which are eqally if not more important. India has a population almost the same as that of China and has access to the same amount of natural resources, yet you can see the difference in their economies.
As I've already stated, India also has great fundamentals but screws up things for themselves much more than China does (even more corruption), which is why it's not growing as fast as China.
Well,China and many other countries do have serious corruption problems.But the main country which practices Legised corruption is US which is being managed by the America’s Capitalist Party(ACP) which have become almost indistinguishable from China's Communist Party ,They’ve used their power to give themselves absurdly high pay(Leegalised corruption); they have no accountability to shareholders; and they’ve created a new caste, which is now exercising enormous political power.
India is not growing as fast because of a poor choice of economic development model. Like China, India must rely on exports instead of on its local market in order to achieve a sustainable high economic growth rate. For that it must keep its currency undervalued. Let the Indian Government be empowered to determine the exchange rate of the Indian rupee instead of letting international institutional investors fix the exchange rate.
BTW the Red Princelings, when they are not snorting too much white powder and banging white Jewish girls, are actually learning this stuff at Harvard and Stanford. Economic reforms will come to China eventually, and the quicker the better.
Actually India is not growing because it is very very corrupt and thus makes uncompetitive economic regulations for the personal gains of India's politicians (they are being bribed by businesses to make these uncompetitive regulations that are bad for India as a whole but good for these special interests). Read the numerous articles of India's economy on this website for more information.
The young Indian Bhramins are also educated in Cambridge, Oxford and Harvard, etc and though corruption is very high in India yet it is not the determining factor. The exchange rate of the currency is the determining factor.
How does young Indians being educated at Oxbridge have anything to do with "corruption is not the determining factor" for economic growth?
Just FYI, India is growing at 7-9% a year, which isn't too far behind China and much faster than the developed economies. By your logic, India's system should also be better than the West's, but you would never say that because you hate the Indians.
Also you haven't provided any evidence for why an artificially undervalued currency is good for a country's economy (the opposite is actually true; a freely traded currency maximizes efficiency). China knows that an non-free currency is bad for its economy, and the only reason China still pegs the RMB to the dollar is because of strict domestic capital controls that cannot handle a free RMB at the moment. If you're going to peg your currency, then it's better to slightly undervalue it than overvalue it.
Why do you think China voluntarily let the RMB appreciate against the dollar in 2005? This was before the Americans tried to put any pressure on China to let the RMB float.
I was answering two different posts in one post.
Though the Indian economy was growing at 7-9 % over the last few years, it will slow down due to its over-reliance on the local market and a smaller level of investments compared to China.
I do not hate Indians and I know India much more than you would think. The Indian Prime Minister who launched the Indian economy after its independence was Rao in the early 1990s. He opened the Indian economy to foreign investments and promoted exports. However, most Indians do not understand that only anexport-led growth would enable India to grow very rapidly. The high economic growth rates of Japan, Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore and Hong Kong in the 1960s and 70s were also based on exports.
No system is corruption free, but a poll of businesses and average citizens shows that people perceive that SG has far less corruption than China.
http://cpi.transparency.org/cpi2011/results/
Except that as GDP per capita rise, the cost of labor rises which makes cheap exports less competitive. The middle income trap occurs (like it did in Mexico, Thailand, and many other countries stuck it in) when export economies became too rich to export cheaply and failed to develop a strong consumer economy.
I know you hate Western economists, so go read what the Chinese economists have to say; they'll say the same thing.... Go read the People's Bank of China report on how China needs to reform its economy into a consumer one for both stability (over reliance on exports to the West) and growth. Go read what Wen Jiabao and Hu Jintao are saying about how China needs to develop a consumer economy.
It's like you hate the West so much that you'll oppose whatever the West has to say but miss the fact that the Chinese leaders are saying the same thing.
I can provide you lots of evidence to show that an undervalued currency leads to high economic growth rate and an over valued currency results in stagnation or even the regression of an economy. However, I cannot do it now. Suffice it for me to say than when the Japanese yen was undervalued in the 1960s and 1970s, the Japanese economy was growing at 12-13% per annum but now that its currency is overvalued, its economy is stagnating or even regressing slowly. There was a time in the 1960s when one US dollar was exchnaged for 350 yen, now one US dollar is exchanged for 100 yen. In other words, the Japanese yen has appreciated by over 350%.
China, like Japan before, was pressured by the US to appreciate its currency. China has no choice but to comply because the US was ans still is a major market. However, unlike Japan, the Chinese yuan has appreciated by 40 % and not 350% as in the case of the Japanese yen.
I can even give you the theory that would sustain my statement but it would require a book, which incidentally I wrote in order to expound my theory.
lol
I do not hate the western countries as I do not hate the Indians. I am just defending China. I have read a lot of books written by western economists including Adam Smith, Marshall, John Maynard Keynes, etc because I studied economics at The London School of Economics. I do not need to read Chinese reports to know what is right or wrong. Whether you believe in me or not is not my problem just like it is not my problem when you laugh aloud.
lol again, and on so many levels
"because I studied economics at The London School of Economics"
Why do I not believe you?
"Whether you believe in me or not is not my problem"
Why did you preemptively write that I probably will not believe you? I think Sigmund Freud would have something to say about your actions.
BTW I really want to read your book. Can you provide the title to it, or a link where I can purchase it?
Export led economics is very well the norm for growing a counry's economy. But there are several factors responsible for this to happen. If you refer to Michael Porter's national diamond theory which talks about a nation's competitive advantage, India has none. The Japaesne are good at electronics and cars, Germans are good at Cars and chemicals, Americans are good at Software and technology. Where does India's and China's competitive edges lie?? No one knows! Thus the only way exports can happen in these countries are relying on foreign companies investing in manufacturing their products in India or China and exporting it from there.
You're overgeneralizing these anecdotal strengths of different countries. (eg Germany's export of cars only consist of 4% of Germany's total economy)
These types of competitive advantages also change over time. Eg America made competitive cars (fast, large, gas guzzling ones) when oil was cheap, but failed to adopt to Japanese and German efficiency when oil became much more expensive after the Iraq War, and the fact that China's COMAC could very well challenge the Boeing/Airbus duopoly within the next 10-20 years by offering more cost effective jets to developing market airlines.
The one thing that does not suffer much from competitiveness changes (eg Apple vs HTC vs Samsung) is domestic consumption. It doesn't matter whether American Apple or Taiwanese HTC or Korean Samsung makes the best smartphones, because in a consumer economy, people purchasing these products would contribute similar levels of GDP regardless of which company wins in this competition.
The economic development of a country, which starts at a lower level, goes through several phases. It starts by having foreign companies investing in the country, exporting practically all their products and using cheap local labour. Inevitably, the technology involved is very low. The, local companies imitate these foreign companies and other foreign companies with a higher level of technology join. And it continues like that with higher and higher technical skills and technology until the economy slowly becomes more innovative and inventive. Japan might have been goos in electronics and even cars but slowly it is giving away its technological and competitive edge to other countries and the Japanese electronic and car companies will turn into ghosts. And this is due to the persistent overvalued Japanese yen for over three decades. China will move soon to the stage of innovation, invention and local brands in a few years at least in some regions because the economic development in China is unequal. In which field will China dominate other countries? No one can foresee. It might be in high speed railways or nuclear energy or electronics or another products. It depends to some extent on whether a Chinese genius comes along and invent or develop something especial in a particular field or it depends on whether a country with a particular advantage in a particular field suddenly drops off and is replaced by China. Nevertheless, so long as China does not allow its currency to become overvalued, it will find some or many fields in which it will excell. India, too, can do the same if it pursues an export-led policy accompanied by an undervalued currency over a long period of time. The Indians will have to deal with corruption as best as they can but we all know that it cannot and will not be eliminated. It will act as a drag but it will not obliterate the economic development of the country.
From reading your comments about Economics, I know that LSE degree is not worth the paper its printed on. I guess its correct, considering that 50% of the students are not British.
In politics or all human affairs of a considerable scale and organization, there is no such thing as zero curruption. It is only a matter of obviously corruption by breaking the law or discreet corruption in disguise by devising unfair rules in favour of vested interest group. Those not in power are likely to be the former, those in power are most capable of doing the latter. As long as there is no system to check, it is a sorry state we are in.
The Americans must be ashamed because Mr. Chen, among all the foreign embassies, chose the American Embassy for refuge.
Has he not heard that the Americans are evil? What was he thinking? Has he lost him mind after being tough-loved by his kinsmen?
Now, all the sins bestowed upon Mr. Chen must be forgiven. He has become a traitor to his all glorious motherland.
Let him rot in America.
I must say that your comedy is several notches below Barack Obama's and Jimmy Kimmel's.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6IoVSbjmTZs&list=PL68E5678430D1E268&index...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DcqYFPRyyp8
I sit between Obama and Kimmel.
Obama was hilarious. Kimmel was not funny at all or he is just not my type of comedian.
Those are going to be some unhappy security goons. If they are lucky they will standing night time guard duty some where the average low is minus thirty or so. If the higher ups don't have a sense of humour they will be on the other end of the truncheon.
Hey, here is a proposal to the US government.
Torture Mr. Chen. I am serious. If Mr. Chen can be tortured in China, why not is the American Embassy?
Torture him more than what he had suffered under the Chinese hands. Many people would applaud to see the scene when Mr. Chen would crawl out of the US Embassy in all fours. That would prove once again that the western countries are evil while China was just practicing tough love.
I suppose Hillary Clinton must be coming to China with a team of torturers from Guantanamo.
Guantanamo is just kids play because the tortured were all foreigners and terrorist suspects.
American must learn from the real masters, i. e. CCP.
But then, Hillary must take Bill with her because her security guards are not to be trusted after their recent exploits. Are they kids too? It seems that there are only kids in the US including the torturers in Guantanamo.
Actually alot of the torture methods used in Guantanamo, was adopted from Chinese methods of torture used on American POW during the Korean War. The Chinese did not invent water boarding, the Spanish did, but the Americans were inspired by the Chinese use of it. The Chinese methods were not torture but enhanced interrogation techniques. Why did the Americans copy the Chinese, because Chinese methods were alot more civilized and bore no scars.
So, you do admit there are torturers in guantanamo and it is not kids' play. Do you use them from time to time in the US embassy in Djakarta?
Learn thy history and be proud, e.g. 张志新. Have not mercy on your own kinsmen.
Well the Americans also launched a Hellfire missile strike via Reaper drone on this American citizen.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anwar_al-Awlaki
I guess Muslim Americans are not considered Americans by Americans, just like Chen is not considered Chinese by the CPC.
Apparently these missiles can be fired by hand lol
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RHPVDRXKGfc
I bet the terrorists would love to get their hands on these babies.
[ alex65 May 1st, 22:18
Hey, here is a proposal to the US government.
Torture Mr. Chen. I am serious. If Mr. Chen can be tortured in China, why not is the American Embassy?
Torture him more than what he had suffered under the Chinese hands. Many people would applaud to see the scene when Mr. Chen would crawl out of the US Embassy in all fours. That would prove once again that the western countries are evil while China was just practicing tough love.]
Mr Chen is a decent man. He has no political agendas. All that he wants is that the Chinese officials treat the people they rule fairly. So, your suggestion seems rather extreme!
However, if Hillary would take a lesson from Bill and try to have sex with Chen, THAT might scare the hell out of Chen and make him leave the US Embassy voluntarily. ;-D...
[ alex65 May 1st, 22:18
Hey, here is a proposal to the US government.
Torture Mr. Chen. I am serious. If Mr. Chen can be tortured in China, why not is the American Embassy?
Torture him more than what he had suffered under the Chinese hands. Many people would applaud to see the scene when Mr. Chen would crawl out of the US Embassy in all fours. That would prove once again that the western countries are evil while China was just practicing tough love.]
Mr Chen is a decent man. He has no political agendas. All that he wants is that the Chinese officials treat the people they rule fairly. So, your suggestion seems rather extreme!
However, if Hillary would take a lesson from Bill and try to have sex with Chen, THAT might scare the hell out of Chen and make him leave the US Embassy voluntarily. ;-D...
Devil's
[ alex65 May 1st, 22:18
Hey, here is a proposal to the US government.
Torture Mr. Chen. I am serious. If Mr. Chen can be tortured in China, why not is the American Embassy?
Torture him more than what he had suffered under the Chinese hands. Many people would applaud to see the scene when Mr. Chen would crawl out of the US Embassy in all fours. That would prove once again that the western countries are evil while China was just practicing tough love.]
Mr Chen is a decent man. He has no political agendas. All that he wants is that the Chinese officials treat the people they rule fairly. So, your suggestion seems rather extreme!
However, if Hillary would take a lesson from Bill and try to have sex with Chen, THAT might scare the hell out of Chen and make him leave the US Embassy voluntarily. ;-D...
[ alex65 May 1st, 22:18
Hey, here is a proposal to the US government.
Torture Mr. Chen. I am serious. If Mr. Chen can be tortured in China, why not is the American Embassy?
Torture him more than what he had suffered under the Chinese hands. Many people would applaud to see the scene when Mr. Chen would crawl out of the US Embassy in all fours. That would prove once again that the western countries are evil while China was just practicing tough love.]
Mr Chen is a decent man. He has no political agendas. All that he wants is that the Chinese officials treat the people they rule fairly. So, your suggestion seems rather extreme!
However, if Hillary would take a lesson from Bill and try to have sex with Chen, THAT might scare the hell out of Chen and make him leave the US Embassy voluntarily. ;-D...
Devil's
I just outsource it to the Indonesians. What a silly individual you are, there is no real torture in Gitmo. In fact, the inmates at Gitmo are the lucky ones. The real baddies are sent back to their own countries or to East Europeans to be tortured. If you spent a week in a Turkish custody, you will be begging to be sent back to the US.
Actually there is a way for Beijing to resolve the Chen case without further embarassment.
Do it in the way of Wukan.
"Double Discipline" the local officials in Shandong who abused their power. Blame them solely for their excesses and claim that the central government isn't aware of the abuse (of course Beijing knew it all along).
In the meantime, Chen should stay put in US embassy until after the conference for "power allocation" is concluded in Beijing this fall (any premature release of Chen will be a cause for another possible power struggle).
Anyway, what Chen advocates against, i.e. forced abortion, is nothing new. Chen just speaks of the basic human right, which according to Prime Minister Wen, is "universal value".
Of course, Guangdong is more liberal than Shandong. The CCP provincial authority in Guangdong could admit fault but their counterpart in Shandong may not.
Chen is a problem not for China but for the US. The Chinese authorities are happy that they have got rid of Chen and they don't want to see him in China anymore.
On the other hand, Chen has become a headache for the US authorities. What will they do with him? Right now, he is in the US embassy and Gary Locke would like him to move away. But where would he go? The US government don't want him in the US and has made it clear both to the US ambassador in Beijing and to the US-funded agency that organised the "escape".
If I were Premier Wen, I would have thanked Ambassador Locke again for sheltering Chen in addition to sheltering Wang Lijun.
Why? Very simple.
If Chen is "kicked out" from the US embassy in Beijing, what should the Chinese guards do? Arrest a blind man? On what charge? Under the watchful eyes of hundreds of foreign reporters?
Beijing is not like the "Village of Zombies" in Shandong where the local government got RMB60 million annually for "maintaining stability" and assigned 100 watchmen to nail down a blind man like Chen.
What can be done in the lawless village in Shandong cannot be repeated in the Chinese capital of Beijing.
And of course if US wants to embarass China, they can let Chen produce make some more videos of "Ask Hu Jintao 3 Questions", "Ask Zhou Yongkan 3 Questions",.....etc. in the embassy and put them on the internet.
But so far the Obama Administration and Ambassador Locke are extremely friendly to Beijing. After the US Consulate in Chengdu knew the top secret from Wang Lijun that Guo Kailai murdered her British friend/financial consultant/lover, US has never leaked a single word until Xinhua blew it in open.
The Chinese authorities are thankful that they have got rid of Chen. Actually, the Chinese authorities were aware that Chen was "escaping" with the assistance of a foreign organisation, but they did nothing to stop him because his escape suit their purpose. They simply don't want him in China and if he could go to another country, it would save the Chinese Authorities time, money and effort to keep him in jail or in house arrest.
But the US embassy cannot kick him out of its premises because an uninspired US-funded organisation actually organised his escape. At the same time, the US authorities do not want him in the US. The only solution is to hope that a third country is willing to shelter him.
I guess you haven't gotten the party line. Its OK to blame the Western media, but not the Western governments in both Chen and Bo Xilai's case.
http://www.globaltimes.cn/NEWS/tabid/99/ID/707308/US-embassy-in-a-quanda...
http://europe.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2012-04/29/content_15176266.htm
If you care for China, you would refrain from saying its a foreign government plot, because to be frank your beloved CPC government needs the West to find out how much money Bo Xilai has hidden away in the West. The Americans have kept quiet about both Wang and Chen. The Chinese don't know what Wan Lijun told the Americans. But they do know what Wang knows, and its not good. Is it wise to go around bad mouthing the US?
Global Times needs a better English language editor (or a few). Anyone know where I can submit my CV?
Apparently media personalities and editors are interchangeable between China and the West, notwithstanding Chinese state sponsored propaganda. This girl was born in Canada, started her career for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation, then moved to Beijing to be an anchor for CCTV, and now is an anchor for Bloomberg.
http://www.bloomberg.com/personalities/susan_li/
Killer legs BTW
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YKNAuDL-sbw
While the Chinese government has to thank the western government for keeping quiet, Chinese in general should thank the western media for those entertaining "rumors" (which are mostly proven true stories afterward) which let them realize how those top brass CCP "comrades" live extravagantly!
If WSJ didn't report that Bo GuaGua drove Ferrari, those leftist back in China who feverishly support Bo might think GuaGua walked 4 miles to school under snowstorm in the spirit of "Lei Feng"!
If Daily Mail didn't report that Guo Kailai had an alleged MI6 Briton as her lover, those leftists in China might think that Kailai has a crush on the proletariat Kim Jong Un!
Thanks to those "malicious" western media like NYJ, WSJ, Guardian, Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph,...etc., many Chinese have watched a very amusing soap opera so far.
But why is Economist not as entertaining as the above western media recently?
Well it's not just the Western media entertaining us with the Bo soap opera. Read this:
http://www.wantchinatimes.com/news-subclass-cnt.aspx?id=20120502000018&c...
They need a lobotomy more than they need a better English editor. She is pretty, but her legs are OK. Her leg to torso ratio is too low to have "killer legs". Yes, I am channeling the Ridiculously Photogenic Guy "Daveycool".
Or just acknowledge you are an abhorrent authoritarian regime that regularly infringes its citizens Human Rights and tortures them on a daily basis, and then proceed to free all political prisoners and apply Rule of Law.
But that would be a bit too much to ask, wouldn't it?
Why don't you try to ask nicely for Putin to give up absolute power and install true democracy and rule of law in Russia, or the Americans to stop invading other countries? Oh wait you can ask but they won't oblige because you don't hold any leverage over them.
You romantic types are best used solving micro-issues, such as starting a charity to help put girls in Africa through primary school or joining the Peace Corps.
You are close to useless trying to solve macro-issues because you're blinded by your romantics and thus unable to think at a strategic level.
The world basically comes down to power. Ethical theories such as utilitarianism or kantianism are nice and all to talk about, but at the end of the day people will almost always pursue their own self interests over any ethical theories, or they will ethically rationalize their self interest by adhering to rational egoism.
The CPC has power in China, so they can do whatever they want to smelly blind guy, fat activist, and the Tibetans.
The Americans have power in the world, so they can do whatever they want in small Middle Eastern countries.
The world, and humans, are what they are.
Ah, the cynicism. Beware, for it can eat your soul! But I'm afraid you're wrong, though. Even if "the world basically comes down to power" (a very broad-meaning statement that could be true or exactly the opposite, or whatever), in no country with Rule of Law would it be so easy for a regime to "do whatever they want to smelly blind guy". I guess they could still do it, but they would have to be very careful, and could still get their hands burned, so they would rather not. Law is a fragile protection, but a protection nonetheless. One that Chinese don't have the luxury to enjoy.
So no, the world, and humans, might be "what they are", but some regimes are better to their own people than others.
Basically the Chinese government sees the value of the Western media, because it can print stories that it does not want to print. They allow Western journalist to interview
http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/26/world/asia/china-bo-insider-florcruz/index...
One side of the CPC is feeding stories to Wang Kang and he is feeding it to the Western reporters. Anything about Bo Xilai's private life, Gu Kailai relationship with Heywood is OK. They know the Western press likes a circus, and they are giving it to them. It distracts from the real issue of a power struggle in Beijing. When the NYT reports about Bo Xilai tapping phones, then the Chinese press says they are peddling rumors, but had no problems with speeding tickets, rumors of romantic affairs, Gu Kailai dressing as a PLA General. What next? Neil Heywood was accidentally killed by Gu Kailai in a BDSM session.
There is a mini-boom in Hong Kong for books about Bo Xilai
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2012/05/02/bo-xilai-books-boom-in-hon...
Power in a country that is ruled by checks and balances and a strong legal system balances the power between its citizens, which is why this stuff doesn't happen in a country with strong rule of law.
In China, like in Russia and India, power is concentrated in a few people's hands so they can do whatever they want.
Again, it comes down almost 100% to power.
It's simple.
Bo Xilai attempted a coup, along with Zhou Yongkang.
Now the Hu-Xi Clique is terrorizing Bo's family as payback.
Chen Guangcheng's strong will to fight for the ordinary Chinese's rights in what seems to the outside world a human-rights abusing regime is commendable but pointless. Mr Chen, like many other activists, demands China respect basic human rights, which is a good thing, but it is opposite the direction that the reining government intends to take for the goal of lifting the living standard of the Chinese people. A country's strength shall be measured by its economic strength. No country on earth can see its economy decline while maintaining its military superiority. And without military power, a country is subject to the invasion, abuse of foreign powers, as evidenced by what happened to China in the 19th century. Therefore, economic development is China's top priority among others. Two elements are essential for this: a stable environment which can only be maintained through strict crackdown on the fire-igniting voices calling for the overthrowing the government by the scattering activists and a right strategy that effectively utilizes its existing resources for the right projects for the betterment of the country.
And the fact is that the overall happiness of the majority of the Chinese people under the ruling of the CCP is much higher than before despite the human rights problem, which proves China is moving in a right direction in maintaining its economic growth and preserving a peaceful society. Why would you want to disturb that ? The development in politics in China toward a comprehensive, responsible governmental system takes time, and we as Chinese have witnessed great progress made in China in this regard as opposed to several decades ago. The root problem of this long-standing misunderstanding of the west on Chinese problems is because they look at every problem through its single lens, using its western measure as the universal standard and arrogantly neglecting the conditions of China that may be different from its own in culture and economic development. We must remember something must be sacrificed in order to achieve another. The western media really took advantage of this incident to again magnify the human rights problem in China in an evil attempt to engender internal turmoils in China.
Revisit this post when your family has been beaten up by government backed thugs.
Why my family would have been beaten up by government backed thugs in the first place? I bet you never set foot in China. As a man who grew up in China, I can responsibly tell you that you won't have any problem living in China as long as you obey the rules set forth in the China's Constitution. Mr. Chen's act is honorable, but he is stupid to act like this, thinking he alone can change the current situation. To some extent, he is no different from someone who wants to kill himself/herself in order to raise the public awareness of the vulnerability of human life.
Justin Lin, you wrote:
:To some extent, he is no different from someone who wants to kill himself/herself in order to raise the public awareness of the vulnerability of human life."
____________________
You are right. It is just like these stupid Tibetan monks who immolated themselves.
As for human rights violations, they are no more common in China than in other countries. Look at the 40,000 unarmed Libyans that were killed by the NATO bombs.
As for Mr Chen, he is an unknown figure in China. The western media is building him up in order to please the naive and stupid readers in the western countries. He has no more influence on the Chinese society than any other ordinary citizen.
The US-funded agency that organised his "escape" has committed a big blunder that is embarrassing the US Government. So far, the US Government has refuse to comment on this blunder.
This boggles my mind. You're an educated guy from mainland China, yet somehow the actions of imperialist powers 160 years ago are more real to you than the atrocities committed 40 years ago against your parents. If you're parents were sent to the countryside ask them how much the possibility of getting a permanent rural 戶口 freaked them out.
The biggest and most recent danger to Chinese people is not the foreigners, it's your own government (this is actually the case in most countries).
The alternative to the current system in China is not the bloody overthrow and chaos that the government uses to scare the populace, it's Taiwan.
A multiparty, democratic state where the people are richer, healthier, can say what they want, and get socialized medicine. Either Chinese people can do great in a democracy, like they do on Taiwan, or Taiwanese people are not Chinese and thus the mainland can learn nothing from them.
Choose one.
Justin Lin, you only know one facet of Chinese life. If you ever started a business and ran it successfully, then you would know it is much darker than you think. Obeying RULES? You mean you are forced to bribe else you go to jail.
What rules? Corrupted officials that bend rules? You want to listen and obey those injustice? Lol, very naive indeed...
So if China is so great, Mr. Lin, why are there so many Chinese living in North America like Mingze (or Minmin) Xi (Jinping's little daughter)? What about you? Is it Linsanity or Chinsanity?
Also as a Chinese who grew up in China, lived in Singapore and now in Germany, I feel an urge to reply this post. This post is a perfect reflection of how the government wants its people to think of such issues or possibly it is how the government perceive the issue itself. I used to think in perfectly the same way. The main delusions of the post which reflect a quite common mindset among the Chinese are:
1. Only economic and military power is the real measure of a country's strength. The west are actually doing things in this way, any attempt to advocate human rights are total hypocrisy.
I partly agree on this view since I believe soft powers are built upon the hard ones. Also, the West truly act in their own interests. But I also believe that in the western culture, there is an intrinsic respect for individual rights which is in line with the western preach about freedom and individual rights. Western governments are at least comparably good to their own people though they can be brutal to other countries, but the CCP government are bad at both. And the fact that the advocacy of freedom is in the interest of the west does not unjustify the righteousness of the advocacy itself. Similarly, the needs for development does not justify the abuse of the basic human rights.
2. The development requires a stable social and political environment and any attempt to challenge the government will possibly be a source of chaos which will jeopardize the country's progress.
I also believe that a stable environment is vital for a country's development. But it is definitely fallacious to think that any dissent to the government will undermine stability. If you think deeper, this is even ridiculous. How can a case such as Mr.CGC's threaten social stability if the government approaches it in a constructive, open and fair way? Furthermore, even some of these activities bear the risks of stirring up public sentiments, as long as it is right, we've got to do it. “维稳” (keeping stability) should not be done at the price of justice, fairness and humanity. Moreover, I strongly believe that great openness, fairness, justice are the actual source of great stability. China now is like a simmering pressure cooker, if the pressure is not properly released, when the day it explodes, that when the real danger comes.
3. "As a man who grew up in China, I can responsibly tell you that you won't have any problem living in China as long as you obey the rules set forth in the China's Constitution. Mr. Chen's act is honorable, but he is stupid to act like this, thinking he alone can change the current situation."
There should be some adjustment to this comments. Firstly, you will be fine not by obeying the constitution, but by being obedient to the government's will. Secondly, Mr.CGC is not stupid. it is those "stupid" people that as courageous, persevering, accountable as he is that push the human society going forward. And like Mr.Jobs said, "The people who are crazy enough to think that they can change the world, are the ones who do."
"I can responsibly tell you that you won't have any problem living in China as long as you obey the rules set forth in the China's Constitution."
Chen was forbidden from leaving his house and having visitors for 2 years, but he was not under arrest and had no charges filed against him. Please explain how this relates to China's Constitution.
Well said!! Thank you.
"Why my family would have been beaten up by government backed thugs in the first place?"
Maybe because some corrupt official covets the land they plow or where their house is located, and doesn't quite feel like giving them their due compensation. A good-old beating is the best cure for disgruntled lao baixing. They should be ashamed of owning such tempting real estate.
Human rights in the West are so far ahead of China - it is ludicrous what the 50 cent army will say. China is beginning to crack at the seams, which is only good for the 1/2 of the population that has not benefitted from the economicy (now stalled), as well as Tibetans, Uighurs, Falung Gong and other oppressed peoples.
When Communist China finally cracks, it will be even more dramatic and radical than when the USSR imploded. And the revenge exacted on party stooges, many who post here, will not be pretty.
Between you and Jean Michel, I honestly cannot tell who's posts are more factually accurate.
@Gargantua1
Your post pretty extreme and I agree with "Dumb Smelly Indian" on some degree that it is infactual.
First of all, Chinese economy is not stalling... This is The Economist website, I cannot believe you actually saying this...
Secondly, Falung Gong is a radical group. They believe their leader is a living god... I do not want extreme religion in China, which I guess that applys to Tibet's monk that would immolate themselves... extremists only breed extremists.
Thirdly, I highly doubt when China enter Democractic State, these so called "50 cents" will be punished. They are just bunch people failed to realize that they are protecting ELITES that is reaping benefit off the whole population. "50 cents" themselves dont even realize they are also a victim of current regime.
Finally, when Communist Party of China does fall. The high ranking officials will be either fleeing or trialed... In the case of fleeing to U.S. and other countries, will U.S. give them back to us for trial? or Will U.S. be protecting them because they bring in so much money? I dont know, but I think the latter happen quite often.
[Gargantua1May 1st, 16:23
Human rights in the West are so far ahead of China - it is ludicrous what the 50 cent army will say. China is beginning to crack at the seams, which is only good for the 1/2 of the population that has not benefitted from the economicy (now stalled), as well as Tibetans, Uighurs, Falung Gong and other oppressed peoples.]
China NEVER make any boast about being the best human rights country in the world. Nor has it boasted of being the "Biggest Democracy" in the world". It is, however, currently the fastest growing large economy in the world. THAT is good enough for China.
Here is how an economy starts to "stall":
http://www.economist.com/blogs/banyan/2012/04/indias-economic-reforms
[When Communist China finally cracks, it will be even more dramatic and radical than when the USSR imploded. And the revenge exacted on party stooges, many who post here, will not be pretty.]
If so, why are you so jealously bitching about it? Wouldn't that be good for YOUR India-- the "stooge" of the white West?
Devil's
I just don't get it.
It depresses me.
Many people in China are aware of their lack of civil liberties. So they emigrate, to the US, the UK, Canada, and Australia, in the hopes that their constitutional rights will be upheld.
They will not.
These rights, for all citizens in the above countries, have been steadily eroding for decades, whereas due to the courage and dignity of the people of China, rights have been steadily improving.
Chinese emigres, would you rather go up- or down-hill?
Stand up for your rights!
But still it's way better than what they have in their own country. The "good life" (or at least its prospect and potential) is nothing to sneeze at either.
Even if human rights in the West have been deteriorating since 9/11, yellow people in the West still enjoy much better human rights than yellow people in Asia (including Japan and South Korea, and obviously North Korea).
So why should the yellow people in the West go back home and fight for human rights there? It's not within their self-interests.
Japan and SoKo? LOLZ. You do NOT even need a visa to get to the US from those places. From your r***st rant, people from these places should be scrambling to escape by the boatloads...er...planeloads. That doesn't seem to be happening :)
What does visa requirements or the fact that there aren't many Japanese/SK refugees to the West have to do with West vs Japan/SK human rights? Obviously your reading comprehension and logical reasoning abilities are very poor.
BTW why do you think it's racist to label East Asians as "yellow" but (presumably) not Africans as "black" or Europeans as "white"?
See your logical reasoning abilities are very very poor.
NO. Your assertion that the human rights in Japan or SoKo is inane and preposterous. And if the human rights conditions in these places are SOOOO BADDDD then they should be leaving their countries by the boatloads. Especially given the visa-free travel. That's the point, kapisch?
Freedom house rankings (1 is the best and 7 is the worst, look for Japan and SoKo):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World_%28report%29
By your own link, it states that the US, UK, and Germany (three sample countries for "the West") scores 1 and 1 for political rights and civil liberties respectively. Japan and SK scores a lower 1 and 2; hence Japan and SK have worse human rights than the West.
See your reading comprehension skills and logical reasoning abilities are really horrible.
Big f***in deal! It does NOT matter at that level! Nobody gives a flying rat's ass. Looks like I was arguing with a child. People can make whose logical skills were better after this exchange.
Aufwiedersehen!
lol loser. BTW why do you think "it doesn't matter at that level"? Maybe we should take 14% of your paycheck (1/7) because the difference between 7/7 and 6/7 in your paycheck "doesn't matter at that level"?
Being Chinese is not a matter of citizenship but more of loyalty to the Great Han Civilization and its Heavenly Mandate, whether it is ruled by Mongols, Manchus or the present Communist Party of China. As a Chinese, you are not supposed to question the authority of the Rulers of China wherever you may live (including Boston, USA). The "Elders" know better and Harmony (and Greed) is the goal, not Freedom. (that kind of thing is taught in Confucius Institutes)
tocharian....
What the hell is wrong with you... you are just spewing non senses. You dont sound Chinese.
THEREFORE, you are not Chinese THEN you cannot talk about BEING Chinese. lol... I guess I have to agree with below posters. You sound like a racist.
I think some retaliatory action against the Burmese is in line to balance the karma for tocharian's actions. Buddha would not be happy otherwise.
I am happy that there are still brave souls like Mr. Chen who fight for basic human rights in the face of overwhelming opposition. How can his Chinese minders sleep at night when they terrorize a blind a frail citizen ?
My best wishes for Mr. Chen, his family and friends. They are truly an inspiration. The words of Churchill come to mind:
"Never give in. Never give in. Never, never, never, never -- in nothing, great or small, large or petty -- never give in, except to convictions of honor and good sense. Never yield to force. Never yield to the apparently overwhelming might of the enemy."
Ah Chruchill, a r***st who was responsible for millions of deaths from famines in India during the heydays of the British Empire. Some exemplar for human rights he!
You claim that Churchill is responsible for "millions of deaths from famines in India" - can you cite some literature to back this outrageous claim ?
It is off topic so I will try to be brief. There is a recent book named "Churchill's Secret War" by Madhusree Mukerjee. The reviews have been pretty positive (even Tory mouthpiece and an Empire apologist Telegraph didn't have much bad to say about it though in the title it just says Churchill "blamed") and some suggest it has been well researched. But I haven't read the book. Here are some reviews:
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/books/reviews/churchills...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/india/7991820/Winston-Chu...
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2031992,00.html
There wasa famine during the middle of World War 2, to Churchill's credit, the empire was engaged in a life or death struggle, but government negligence was a significant
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bengal_famine_of_1943
Also, Churchill was really, really quite racist. In response to an urgent request by the Secretary of State for India, Leo Amery, and Viceroy of India Archibald Wavell, to release food stocks for India, Winston Churchill responded with a telegram to Wavell asking, if food was so scarce, "why Gandhi hadn’t died yet."
I think the above two posters are right.. I am avid reader of WW2 history. Churchill has been documented as a racist.. lol..
why was india exporting food to british troops while millions of indians were dying during british rule of india
Hmmm. This is interesting. In case you did not know, it shows you the enormous power and influence the US still has in the world.
"Chen had initially been reluctant to leave China, but now accepted that it would be difficult for him to stay, and was prepared to go into exile in the United States as long as his family could accompany him, Fu said."
http://www.afp.com/en/news/topstories/china-us-talks-allow-chen-leave-ac...
Hmmm NOT so fast it seems! The latest news is that CGC has left US Embassy of "his own accord". If you believe that at face value I've got a bridge in Brooklyn to sell ya!
Anyways he is undergoing treatment at a Beijing hospital currently. Looks to me like the US blinked on this one. Poor Mr Chen, he looks like a complete fool now.
I guess that's it then, the show's over. For now. Good night and good luck to the blind lawyer! Most likely, this will be the last we hear of him. Hopefully, for good reasons. But maybe, to paraphrase Ogden Nash, that's hoping against hope hopen!
From the horse's mouth aka the Noo York Times:
Some LOLZ-worthy snippets:
"“Mr. Chen has a number of understandings with the Chinese government about his future, including the opportunity to pursue higher education in a safe environment,” she added. “Making these commitments a reality is the next crucial task.”"
Understandings? Yeah sure! And he did all this so he could go to college? He has got pretty good odds of doing that now I'd say! He is going learn some new things in the safest environment possible. Good luck!
"As he left the embassy for the hospital, Mrs. Clinton phoned Mr. Chen in what the two American officials said was an emotional conversation since both Mrs. Clinton and Mr. Chen knew of each other but had never met. At the end of the talk, according to one of the officials, Mr. Chen said to Mrs. Clinton: “I would like to kiss you.”
Kiss her? WTH? On the hands or in her lips?! Either case, yikes!
What did he think? He and Hilary were in Big Brother or Celebrity Apprentice?
Read more at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/03/world/asia/chen-guangcheng-leaves-us-e...
You have to ask yourself what were the US diplomats dealing with the case thinking? Get rid of the guy as fast as possible so as not to cause disruption at the Summit.
The US officials might be thinking, his whole escape seems to be a bit contrived. How did China allow him to walk past the PSB guarding the Embassy in Beijing? Why did he make a video calling for Wen Jiabao to look at corruption? After the Wang Lijun incident, would you expect the Chinese would put more guards in front of US diplomatic missions?
Getting asylum is not at all what is cracked up to be. As long as he remains in China he will get the attention, once he is out he will disappear.
In normal situation, it would be merely a human rights case, but with his plea to Wen Jiabao, its become sideshow in China's palace politics. Both this case and Wang Lijun are both interlinked with China's internal politics.
A shrill NYT Op-Ed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/01/opinion/chen-guangcheng.html?_r=1&hp
As per WSJ, CGC does not want to leave, he wanted safety and NOT asylum it seems.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405270230405030457737601333743879...
Interesting, if true. It complicates matters for US. Or does it?