- Joined
- Oct 17, 2007
- Messages
- 11,862
- Reaction score
- 10,300
- Location
- New York
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Centrist
Re: Activist Chen Guangcheng chose to stay in China to protect family from death thre
It appears that Chen, in fact, had a change of mind. The Washington Post has a story that discusses it. In part, the article provides the following advice from his attorney:
“Even if you're not considering this for yourself, then at least for your family and for those that tried to help you, you should try to get back to the embassy and make your way to the U.S.,” Teng told Chen, according to the transcript. “You've done way too much for human rights in China, you've made too many sacrifices. We don't want you to sacrifice or give more of yourself. Please reconsider.”
The arrangement that was reportedly agreed was not enforceable. The Embassy relied on good faith alone. Now, if Chen insisted on leaving after having been warned of the limitations of the arrangement, that was one thing. The U.S. Embassy could not hold someone against his will. IMO, given China's sensitivity to what it perceives as interference in its domestic affairs--a sensitivity that is rooted in China's past when various major powers exploited its weakness and intervened freely--some kind of quid-pro-quo will likely be needed for Chen to be permitted to leave China. Whether the quid-pro-quo amounts to some kind of assurances about future U.S. conduct to prevent similar cases, linkage to some other issue that is important to China, or some other form of consideration e.g., China's expelling one or more U.S. diplomats involved in the case, remains to be seen.
"...'I would like to say to President Obama: please do everything you can to get our family out,' Chen told CNN, according to a translation of his quote.
He also accused US embassy officials of pushing him hard to leave the safety of the embassy on Wednesday where he had sought refuge for six days after fleeing his home in the eastern province of Shandong.
'The embassy kept lobbying me to leave and promised to have people stay with me in the hospital, but this afternoon, as soon as I checked into the hospital room, I noticed they were all gone,' Chen told CNN by phone."
It appears that Chen, in fact, had a change of mind. The Washington Post has a story that discusses it. In part, the article provides the following advice from his attorney:
“Even if you're not considering this for yourself, then at least for your family and for those that tried to help you, you should try to get back to the embassy and make your way to the U.S.,” Teng told Chen, according to the transcript. “You've done way too much for human rights in China, you've made too many sacrifices. We don't want you to sacrifice or give more of yourself. Please reconsider.”
The arrangement that was reportedly agreed was not enforceable. The Embassy relied on good faith alone. Now, if Chen insisted on leaving after having been warned of the limitations of the arrangement, that was one thing. The U.S. Embassy could not hold someone against his will. IMO, given China's sensitivity to what it perceives as interference in its domestic affairs--a sensitivity that is rooted in China's past when various major powers exploited its weakness and intervened freely--some kind of quid-pro-quo will likely be needed for Chen to be permitted to leave China. Whether the quid-pro-quo amounts to some kind of assurances about future U.S. conduct to prevent similar cases, linkage to some other issue that is important to China, or some other form of consideration e.g., China's expelling one or more U.S. diplomats involved in the case, remains to be seen.