www.Bearcanada.com Editor’s Note: This article is copyrighted by the UK Telegraph. It is reproduced and posted here for two reasons. One is to prevent this knowledge from being lost if the original page is taken offline. The second is to help spread the truth of this event to as many people as possible.
Students link arms to hold back angry crowds from chasing a group of retreating soldiers. Photo: AP Photo/Mark Avery Wikileaks: no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square, US Embassy cables claim.
Secret cables from the United States embassy in Beijing have shown there was no bloodshed inside Tiananmen Square when China put down student pro-democracy demonstrations 22 years ago.
The cables, obtained by Wikileaks and released exclusively by The Daily Telegraph, partly confirm the Chinese government’s account of the early hours of June 4, 1989. It has always insisted that soldiers did not massacre demonstrators inside the square.
Instead, the cables show that Chinese soldiers opened fire on protesters outside the centre of Beijing as they fought their way towards the square from the west of the city.
Three cables were sent from the US embassy on June 3, in the hours leading up to the suppression, as diplomats realised that the final showdown between the protesters and soldiers was looming.
The cables described the “10,000 to 15,000 helmeted, armed troops” moving into the city, some of whom were “carrying automatic weapons”.
At the same time, “elite airborne troops” and “tank units” were said to be moving up from the south.
The army came up against “an elaborate system of blockades”, described in a cable from May 21, 1989, which allowed students to “control much of central Beijing”.
Diplomats observed that “there were buses turned sideways to form roadblocks” and students had vowed the army would not be able to cross. “But we doubt it”, one cable added. Students also used teams of motorcycle couriers to communicate with the roadblocks, sending reinforcements where needed.
As the troops moved in, the cables stated that diplomatic staff were repeatedly warned to “stay at home” unless involved in front-line reporting. “The situation in the centre of the city is very confused,” said a cable from June 3. “Political officers at the Beijing Hotel reported that troops are pushing a large crowd east on Chang’an avenue. Although these troops appear not to be firing on the crowd, they report firing behind the troops coming from the square”.
Inside the square itself, a Chilean diplomat was on hand to give his US counterparts an eyewitness account of the final hours of the pro-democracy movement.
A student shouts for the soldiers to go back home as crowds flooded into the central Beijing Photo: AFP PHOTO “He watched the military enter the square and did not observe any mass firing of weapons into the crowds, although sporadic gunfire was heard.
He said that most of the troops which entered the square were actually armed only with anti-riot gear – truncheons and wooden clubs.
They were backed up by armed soldiers,” a cable from July 1989 said.
The diplomat, who was positioned next to a Red Cross station inside Tiananmen Square, said a line of troops surrounded him and “panicked” medical staff into fleeing.
However, he said that there was “no mass firing into the crowd of students at the monument”.
According to internal Communist party files, released in 2001, 2,000 soldiers from the 38th army, together with 42 armoured vehicles, began slowly sweeping across the square from north to south at 4.30am on June 4.
At the time, around 3,000 students were sitting around the Monument to the People’s Heroes on the southern edge of the giant square, near Chairman Mao’s mausoleum.
Leaders of the protest, including Liu Xiaobo, the winner of last year’s Nobel Peace prize, urged the students to depart the square, and the Chilean diplomat relayed that “once agreement was reached for the students to withdraw, linking hands to form a column, the students left the square through the south east corner.” The testimony contradicts the reports of several journalists who were in Beijing at the time, who described soldiers “charging” into unarmed civilians and suggests the death toll on the night may be far lower than the thousands previously thought.
In 2009, James Miles, who was the BBC correspondent in Beijing at the time, admitted that he had “conveyed the wrong impression” and that “there was no massacre on Tiananmen Square. Protesters who were still in the square when the army reached it were allowed to leave after negotiations with martial law troops [ …] There was no Tiananmen Square massacre, but there was a Beijing massacre”.
Instead, the fiercest fighting took place at Muxidi, around three miles west of the square, where thousands of people had gathered spontaneously on the night of June 3 to halt the advance of the army.
According to the Tiananmen Papers, a collection of internal Communist party files, soldiers started using live ammunition at around 10.30pm, after trying and failing to disperse the crowd with tear gas and rubber bullets. Incredulous, the crowd tried to escape but were hampered by its own roadblocks.
The cables also reveal the extent to which the student democracy protests had won popular support, and how for several weeks the protesters effectively occupied the whole of central Beijing, posing an existential challenge to the Communist party.
One cable, from May 21, 1989, reports that an anonymous caller had told the US consulate in Shenyang that Ni Zhifu, the chairman of China’s labour unions, had condemned martial law in the capital and warned that unless the students were treated with more respect he would lead a general workers’ strike that would cripple China.
Five key extracts from the WikiLeaks files on Tiananmen.
You can read theOriginal Articlehere.
8:00AM BST 04 Jun 2011
1. From 89BEIJING18828 – July 7, 1989. A Chilean diplomat provides an eye-witness account of the soldiers entering Tiananmen Square: HE WATCHED THE MILITARY ENTER THE SQUARE AND DID NOT OBSERVE ANY MASS FIRING OF WEAPONS INTO THE CROWDS, ALTHOUGH SPORADIC GUNFIRE WAS HEARD. HE SAID THAT MOST OF THE TROOPS WHICH ENTERED THE SQUARE WERE ACTUALLY ARMED ONLY WITH ANTI-RIOT GEAR–TRUNCHEONS AND WOODEN CLUBS; THEY WERE BACKED UP BY ARMED SOLDIERS.
2. From 89BEIJING18828 – July 7, 1989. A Chilean diplomat provides an eye-witness account of the soldiers entering Tiananmen Square: ALTHOUGH GUNFIRE COULD BE HEARD, HE SAID THAT APART FROM SOME BEATING OF STUDENTS, THERE WAS NO MASS FIRING INTO THE CROWD OF STUDENTS AT THE MONUMENT.
3. From 89BEIJING14047 – May 21, 1989. Diplomats describe how the students have control of central Beijing through an elaborate system of blockades.
AS REPORTED EARLIER, STUDENTS APPEAR TO CONTROL ACCESS TO THE CENTRAL PART OF THE CITY THROUGH A SYSTEM OF BARRICADES AROUND THE SECOND AND THIRD RING ROADS AND AT OTHER MAJOR ROAD APPROACHES TO THE CITY.
POLOFF VISITING ONE SUCH ROADBLOCK AT THE INTERSECTION OF THE THIRD RING ROAD AND JIANGUOMENWAI AVENUE REPORTED THAT THERE ARE MORE THAN 50 BUSSES IN THE AREA. FOURTEEN BUSSES BENEATH THE JIANGUOMENWAI AVENUE OVERPASS CONTROL PASSAGE ON THE THIRD RING ROAD, WHICH RUNS NORTH-SOUTH. THE BUSSES HAVE LEFT A ONE LANE OPENING ALONG THE ROAD AND CAN EASILY BLOCK TRAFFIC BY DRIVING INTO THE LANE.
POLOFF REPORTED THAT CITY BUS DRIVERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR MOVING THEIR VEHICLES AT THIS BARRICADE. ONE APPARENTLY FEARLESS DRIVER WITH WHOM POLOFF TALKED STATED THAT HE AND HIS FELLOWS ARE CONFIDENT THAT THEIR BLOCKADES WILL STOP PLA TANKS. (BUT WE DOUBT IT.)
4. From 89BEIJING14047 – May 21, 1989. An anonymous caller suggest the students have support from the leader of China’s trade unions.
IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THE PARTY CONVENED A CENTRAL COMMITTEE (CCPCC)
MEETING SOMETIME BETWEEN THE NIGHT OF MAY 19 AND EARLY THIS MORNING AT WHICH MEMBERS DISSENTED WITH THE DECISION TO EMPLOY THE PLA TO RESTORE ORDER IN BEIJING. AN ANONYMOUS CALLER WHO PHONED CONGEN SHENYANG ON THE MORNING OF MAY 21 SAID THAT THE PARTY HAD CONVENED A CCPCC MEETING AND THAT CHAIRMAN OF THE ALL CHINA FEDERATION OF LABOR UNIONS NI ZHIFU CONDEMNED THE DECISION TO IMPOSE MARTIAL LAW.
ACCORDING TO THE CALLER, NI DEMANDED AN END TO MARTIAL LAW AND A POSITIVE REASSESSMENT OF THE STUDENT DEMONSTRATIONS. HE ALSO DEMANDED THAT THE GOVERNMENT HOLD TALKS WITH STUDENT LEADERS. THE CALLER CLAIMED THAT NI THREATENED TO LEAD A GENERAL STRIKE IF THE CENTRAL COMMITTEE FAILED TO ACCEPT HIS DEMANDS. THE CALLER DID NOT STATE WHEN OR WHERE THE MEETING WAS HELD OR IF OUT-OF-TOWN MEMBERS ATTENDED.
5. From 89BEIJING14102 – May 22, 1989. Diplomats describe the joyous mood among the protestors after the first introduction of martial law in Beijing fails to halt the pro-democracy movement.
THE SENSE OF VICTORY WHICH THE WEARY DEMONSTRATORS CELEBRATED AT DAYBREAK APPEARED LARGER THAN JUST ONE MORE NIGHT OF DEFIANCE, THE NINTH NIGHT OF THE TIANANMEN OCCUPATION. A WIDESPREAD VIEW AMONG DEMONSTRATORS WAS THAT AFTER THIS NIGHT AND FORTY-EIGHT SURREAL HOURS OF NON-ENFORCED MARTIAL LAW, THE PROVERBIAL “MANDATE”– POLITICAL LEGITIMACY–OF THE CURRENT LEADERSHIP HAS BEEN LOST. IT REMAINS TO BE SEEN, OF COURSE, WHETHER THE LEADERSHIP AGREES.
This article is obtained from www.bearcanada.com.