Tianamen Square lies in the geographical center of Beijing and is the largest city square in the world. Its 526,000 square yards can accommodate in excess of one million people. It was on the rostrum of the Tiananmen Gate (Gate of Heavenly Peace) on the square's northern perimeter that Mao Zedong declared the establishment of the People's Republic of China on October 1, 1949. There are few places in modern China that possess greater cultural and social significance.
DEATH OF A REFORMER Beginning in 1978, a new era of economic and political reforms was initiated throughout China by Premier Deng Xiaoping, the ageing comrade of Chairman Mao and a hero of the Long March. The economic reforms proved popular among China's peasants who saw increases in real wages and demonstrable improvements in their day-to-day lives. Political reform, however, was proving more elusive, and the intelligentsia and student organizations in the country's large cities were becoming increasingly impatient for change. When the progressive political reformer Hu Yaobang, the Communist Party's sixth general secretary, died of a heart attack on April 15, 1989 many viewed his death as extinguishing the last hopes for real democratic reform. Hu's funeral was to take place in Tiananmen Square on April 22, and fifty thousand students planned to participate, using the occasion to deliver a petition to Premier Li Peng critical of the Party's veiled disapproval of Hu's support of both freedom of speech and freedom of the press. The Party saw Hu as uncomfortably close to the nation's "bourgeois liberals" and left-leaning middle-class intelligentsia. Hu had been forced by Party hardliners to resign his position as general secretary in January 1987, and compelled to write a humiliating letter of "self-criticism" of his reformist principles.
Hu's funeral arrangements, along with official government pronouncements of his importance in helping shape modern China, seemed to many to be a little subdued. He had after all fought to rehabilitate those who had suffered under the communists during the Cultural Revolution, and was a supporter of greater autonomy for Tibet, from which he once ordered the withdrawal of thousands of Chinese soldiers and ordered those who remained to learn the Tibetan language. Although Hu's official death announcement contained all the usual communist rhetoric, such as saying he had been a "staunch communist warrior" and a "proletarian revolutionist," he was also said to have made unspecified "mistakes."
On the eve of the funeral, in excess of a million people had gathered in Tiananmen Square and its approaches. The events that were to follow, known within China as the June Fourth Movement, would be the culmination of a protest movement that first began in earnest in December 1986. Students began to take advantage of the first loosening of political control to ask for the right to study abroad as well as greater accessibility to Western culture and influences. Speeches against the slow pace of reform were suddenly being made across the country by leading figures such as Professor Fang Lizhi of the University of Science and Technology in Anhui Province, one of the founders of the pro-democracy movement who had been expelled from the Communist Party in 1987. Fang and his wife took refuge in the U.S. embassy in Beijing on June 5, 1989 and remained there for more than a year before fleeing to England and then on to the United States.
Hu's funeral arrangements, along with official government pronouncements of his importance in helping shape modern China, seemed to many to be a little subdued. He had after all fought to rehabilitate those who had suffered under the communists during the Cultural Revolution, and was a supporter of greater autonomy for Tibet, from which he once ordered the withdrawal of thousands of Chinese soldiers and ordered those who remained to learn the Tibetan language. Although Hu's official death announcement contained all the usual communist rhetoric, such as saying he had been a "staunch communist warrior" and a "proletarian revolutionist," he was also said to have made unspecified "mistakes."
On the eve of the funeral, in excess of a million people had gathered in Tiananmen Square and its approaches. The events that were to follow, known within China as the June Fourth Movement, would be the culmination of a protest movement that first began in earnest in December 1986. Students began to take advantage of the first loosening of political control to ask for the right to study abroad as well as greater accessibility to Western culture and influences. Speeches against the slow pace of reform were suddenly being made across the country by leading figures such as Professor Fang Lizhi of the University of Science and Technology in Anhui Province, one of the founders of the pro-democracy movement who had been expelled from the Communist Party in 1987. Fang and his wife took refuge in the U.S. embassy in Beijing on June 5, 1989 and remained there for more than a year before fleeing to England and then on to the United States.
MASSACRE—OR PROTEST? "The Tiananmen Square Massacre" has become one of those phrases that has entered the world's lexicon and refuses to go away, despite the historical fact that although there were un-deniably protesters killed in the square on June 4 and 5, video footage of the melee shows little actual fighting. CBS news cor-respondent Richard Roth, who was standing on the south portico of the Great Hall of the People that constitutes one of the square's boundaries, was driven in a jeep through the square together with another journalist, Derek Willis, just 40 minutes after they had both heard the sound of gunfire. But they saw no bodies, no injured students or soldiers, and no ambulances. Live on air later that day with the celebrated news anchor Dan Rather of CBS, Roth stuck to his story and referred to the violence that he had witnessed in the square as an "assault" rather than a massacre. Roth, of course, spoke only of what he himself had seen, and had no first-hand knowledge of the violence that had occurred throughout the city. Historians have long shied away from the term Tiananmen Square Massacre and now speak instead of a broader Beijing Massacre.
So what exactly did happen in the Chinese capital on June 4 and 5,1989?
Although portrayed in the Western media as largely a student movement, the demonstrations that began on April 27 touched a nerve with the Chinese populace. In cities across China millions began to appear in their streets in open revolt. They were elderly people, children, labourers, people representing every level of society, who took their lead from the students and dared to show dissent. It was almost a "carnival" of protest. Large-scale protests that erupted in Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Shanghai included doctors, nurses, scientists—even elements of the Chinese navy were protesting. The Chinese press was reporting events freely and relatively unhindered, and hundreds of thousands of protesters were converging on the capital. What had begun as a student protest was evolving into a country-wide phenomenon.
On May 4, one hundred thousand protesters converged on Beijing to march in support of freedom of the press and to open a dialogue between their own elected representatives and the government. The government rejected their overtures, claiming it would speak only to the leaders of recognized, preexisting student organizations. On May 13, just two days before a state visit by the architect of the Soviet Union's own period of openness and reform, Mikhail Gorbachev, the students decided that in order to maintain the momentum they had generated so far, they would initiate a hunger strike. Initially involving just hundreds, the hunger strike soon took on a life of its own. Protesters from regional cities flocked to Tiananmen Square to join it. The protesters were for the most part peaceful, even cooperative with the soldiers and authorities who were moni-toring them. When three students threw ink over the portrait of Chairman Mao that overlooks the square, students assisted police in arresting them.
So what exactly did happen in the Chinese capital on June 4 and 5,1989?
Although portrayed in the Western media as largely a student movement, the demonstrations that began on April 27 touched a nerve with the Chinese populace. In cities across China millions began to appear in their streets in open revolt. They were elderly people, children, labourers, people representing every level of society, who took their lead from the students and dared to show dissent. It was almost a "carnival" of protest. Large-scale protests that erupted in Guangzhou, Hong Kong and Shanghai included doctors, nurses, scientists—even elements of the Chinese navy were protesting. The Chinese press was reporting events freely and relatively unhindered, and hundreds of thousands of protesters were converging on the capital. What had begun as a student protest was evolving into a country-wide phenomenon.
On May 4, one hundred thousand protesters converged on Beijing to march in support of freedom of the press and to open a dialogue between their own elected representatives and the government. The government rejected their overtures, claiming it would speak only to the leaders of recognized, preexisting student organizations. On May 13, just two days before a state visit by the architect of the Soviet Union's own period of openness and reform, Mikhail Gorbachev, the students decided that in order to maintain the momentum they had generated so far, they would initiate a hunger strike. Initially involving just hundreds, the hunger strike soon took on a life of its own. Protesters from regional cities flocked to Tiananmen Square to join it. The protesters were for the most part peaceful, even cooperative with the soldiers and authorities who were moni-toring them. When three students threw ink over the portrait of Chairman Mao that overlooks the square, students assisted police in arresting them.
THE STUDENTS MEET WITH PREMIER LI PENG It was a time of unprecedented dams in which confrontations between the communist leadership and ordinary citizens that would have been considered unthinkable just days earlier were played out on television screens across the nation. On May IS, the Chinese media televised a meeting between Premier Li Peng and two of the student movement's most prominent advocates, Wu'er Kaixi and Wang Dan. Wang was a history student at Peking University, one of the birth-places of the student movement. Wu'er, an ethnic Uyghur and student of Beijing Normal University, interrupted the premier in the midst of his opening remarks and promptly made history: "I understand it is quite rude of me to interrupt you, Premier, but there are people sitting out there in the square, being hungry, as we sit here and exchange pleasantries."
Li broke in to accuse Wu'er of being impolite, but Wu'er realized he must seize the moment and speak not only his own mind, but also on behalf of all those in China who were seeking freedom: "Sir, you said you are here late, but we've actually been calling you to talk to us since April 22. It's not that you are late, it's that you're here too late. But that's fine. It's good that you are able to come here at all ..."
At 5 a.m. on May 19, without warning, the general secretary of the Communist Party, Zhao Ziyang appeared among the students in Tiananmen Square and delivered a speech that had not been sanctioned by the Party leadership. Zhao asked the students to end their hunger strike and their protest before the Party's patience ran out. He promised them that the leadership would continue to discuss their grievances and said that it was wrong for them to put their young lives in jeopardy over issues that he believed could be settled in time through negotiation. It was an extraordinarily conciliatory speech, but the students did not abandon their protest. The following day Zhao was stripped of his position and placed under house arrest. His motivations for pursuing such a uni-lateral act in defiance of his party have remained a subject of debate ever since.
Li broke in to accuse Wu'er of being impolite, but Wu'er realized he must seize the moment and speak not only his own mind, but also on behalf of all those in China who were seeking freedom: "Sir, you said you are here late, but we've actually been calling you to talk to us since April 22. It's not that you are late, it's that you're here too late. But that's fine. It's good that you are able to come here at all ..."
At 5 a.m. on May 19, without warning, the general secretary of the Communist Party, Zhao Ziyang appeared among the students in Tiananmen Square and delivered a speech that had not been sanctioned by the Party leadership. Zhao asked the students to end their hunger strike and their protest before the Party's patience ran out. He promised them that the leadership would continue to discuss their grievances and said that it was wrong for them to put their young lives in jeopardy over issues that he believed could be settled in time through negotiation. It was an extraordinarily conciliatory speech, but the students did not abandon their protest. The following day Zhao was stripped of his position and placed under house arrest. His motivations for pursuing such a uni-lateral act in defiance of his party have remained a subject of debate ever since.
MARTIAL LAW On May 20, the day after Zhao's speech, Premier Li Peng imposed martial law across Beijing. Three hundred thousand troops were ordered to occupy Tiananmen Square, but as the armored personnel carriers and trucks laden with troops moved into the city they found their way forward blocked by hundreds of thousands of protest-ers. Columns of army transports filled with troops were mobbed by citizens demanding to know why they were en-tering their city. "Brother soldiers, you should be defenders of the people!" one elderly woman cried out to a group of seated soldiers. After four days of this impasse, enduring an unprecedented loss of face in the process, the army withdrew to bases outside the city. The protesters had won a memorable triumph. The authorities, however, had not only lost face but were beginning to wonder how long it would be until they lost control—and were deter-mined that such a humiliating event, in full view of the world's media, would not happen again. Meanwhile the demonstrations continued to spread. Three hundred thousand people thronged Hong Kong's famous Happy Valley Racecourse on May 27 to sing democrat-ic songs of encouragement for the Beijing protesters, and the following day a rally involving 1.5 million people, represent-ing twenty-five per cent of the territory's population marched through its streets.
On June 1st, troops from the 27th and 28th Armies were despatched from their barracks outside Beijing and ordered into the city, this time with orders to clear the square by dawn on June 4. In the western suburbs of the capital, every time the troops broke through a blockade, the protesters would fall back and form another blockade further down the street. But inexorably the armed forces—the People's Liberation Army (PLA)—forced their way through blockade after blockade, making their way toward Tiananmen Square.
On June 1st, troops from the 27th and 28th Armies were despatched from their barracks outside Beijing and ordered into the city, this time with orders to clear the square by dawn on June 4. In the western suburbs of the capital, every time the troops broke through a blockade, the protesters would fall back and form another blockade further down the street. But inexorably the armed forces—the People's Liberation Army (PLA)—forced their way through blockade after blockade, making their way toward Tiananmen Square.
THE MILITARY FIRE ON DEMONSTRATORS On the night of June 3, the troops entered the city proper from the surrounding provinces. In response, protesters barricaded the streets leading to the square with buses, trucks and earth-moving equipment. In comparison, the atmosphere in Tiananmen Square itself seemed almost surreal. It was a scene of relative peace on the evening of June 3 compared with the carnage unfolding in the surrounding streets, a place of order and calm in the midst of a gathering cyclone. At around 9:30 p.m. armored personnel carriers began to ram and break through the barricades, and the populace could not believe that the PLA was firing live ammunition upon the very people it was meant to defend. Beijing's citizens were shocked, looking down from their balconies onto troops using battlefield weapons against ordinary men, women and children. Away from the square, in the streets of the capital, people were being shot. Large numbers of casualties were ferried to local hospitals on bicycles, on carts, on anything that moved. Western journalists were being begged to take photos and to film what was happening, and to show the images to the world.
At 5:40 a.m. on June 4, armored personnel carriers and soldiers with bayonets fixed entered Tiananmen Square en masse; several incidents of indiscriminate fire were reported by Western journalists and other eyewitnesses. Some students took refuge in buses but were pulled from them and set upon. The troops effectively blockaded access to the square, and the protesters made several attempts to enter, only to be shot at. Many were shot in the back as they first rushed and then re-treated from the soldiers, who were now under orders to have the square cleared of protesters by 6 a.m. on June 5-(the following morning).
On the morning of June 5, a line of eighteen tanks was making its way from Tiananmen Square along the Avenue of Eternal Peace. An unidentified man suddenly appeared from nowhere, in the full view of the international media. Carrying what looked like shopping bags, he stood defiantly in front of the advancing tanks, forcing them to stop. After several at-tempts were made by the lead tank to go around the man, the engine was turned off. Those behind it did the same. Tank Man (as he is now known) climbed on top of the lead tank and seemed to yell at its crew to turn around. A soldier emerged and after a brief conversation the man climbed down from the tank but again stood before it. He was eventually taken from the scene by what looked like ordinary civilians concerned for his safety. He has never been located or identified. Four photographers—Jeff Widener of the Associated Press, Stuart Franklin of Magnum Photos, Charlie Cole of Newsweek and Arthur Tsang Hin Wah of Reuters—all captured the Tank Man's defiance on film, and the next day the image made headlines across the world. In 1998 Time magazine named the man one of the one hundred most important people of the century.
At 5:40 a.m. on June 4, armored personnel carriers and soldiers with bayonets fixed entered Tiananmen Square en masse; several incidents of indiscriminate fire were reported by Western journalists and other eyewitnesses. Some students took refuge in buses but were pulled from them and set upon. The troops effectively blockaded access to the square, and the protesters made several attempts to enter, only to be shot at. Many were shot in the back as they first rushed and then re-treated from the soldiers, who were now under orders to have the square cleared of protesters by 6 a.m. on June 5-(the following morning).
On the morning of June 5, a line of eighteen tanks was making its way from Tiananmen Square along the Avenue of Eternal Peace. An unidentified man suddenly appeared from nowhere, in the full view of the international media. Carrying what looked like shopping bags, he stood defiantly in front of the advancing tanks, forcing them to stop. After several at-tempts were made by the lead tank to go around the man, the engine was turned off. Those behind it did the same. Tank Man (as he is now known) climbed on top of the lead tank and seemed to yell at its crew to turn around. A soldier emerged and after a brief conversation the man climbed down from the tank but again stood before it. He was eventually taken from the scene by what looked like ordinary civilians concerned for his safety. He has never been located or identified. Four photographers—Jeff Widener of the Associated Press, Stuart Franklin of Magnum Photos, Charlie Cole of Newsweek and Arthur Tsang Hin Wah of Reuters—all captured the Tank Man's defiance on film, and the next day the image made headlines across the world. In 1998 Time magazine named the man one of the one hundred most important people of the century.
THE PROTESTERS LEAVE THE SQUARE Inside the square, meanwhile, a debate had broken out between two student factions, one wanting to stay, the other wanting to leave. The soldiers held their fire and offered amnesty if the protesters agreed to vacate the square. Thousands left Tianan-men Square by its southeast corner, singing the "Internatio-nale," the great revolutionary song of workers and commu-nists, and vowing to carry on the fight. A wholesale massacre had been avoided.
Estimates of the number of dead and injured will forever be debated as the Chinese government never made public its record of the incident. The Chinese Red Cross put the fig-ure at 26,000 people killed and more than 30,000 injured, a total that was of course disputed by the government, which put the number killed at 300 with 7000 injured. Perhaps the most accurate assessment comes from the assembled foreign media who witnessed the attacks from a range of differing perspectives and whose estimates were three thousand killed, close enough to the Red Cross estimate as to represent the most plausible outcome.
The student leaders of the rebellion, many of whom were from affluent and well-connected families, largely escaped execution or long-term prison sentences. Wu'er Kaixi escaped to live in Taiwan and Wang Dan was imprisoned but permitted to emigrate to the United States. Others were imprisoned but released after serving relatively short sentences. Chai Ling, one of the leaders in the latter stages of the protest and one of the chief organizers of the hunger strike, escaped to France in 1990 and eventually settled in the United States. As to what extent the Tiananmen Square protests affected government policy and acted as a catalyst for real change, the answer is: very little. The government continued its repressive policies and, even today, the subject of the student protests of 1989 is a taboo subject in the media. The notion of-freedom of speech in China remains elusive.
Estimates of the number of dead and injured will forever be debated as the Chinese government never made public its record of the incident. The Chinese Red Cross put the fig-ure at 26,000 people killed and more than 30,000 injured, a total that was of course disputed by the government, which put the number killed at 300 with 7000 injured. Perhaps the most accurate assessment comes from the assembled foreign media who witnessed the attacks from a range of differing perspectives and whose estimates were three thousand killed, close enough to the Red Cross estimate as to represent the most plausible outcome.
The student leaders of the rebellion, many of whom were from affluent and well-connected families, largely escaped execution or long-term prison sentences. Wu'er Kaixi escaped to live in Taiwan and Wang Dan was imprisoned but permitted to emigrate to the United States. Others were imprisoned but released after serving relatively short sentences. Chai Ling, one of the leaders in the latter stages of the protest and one of the chief organizers of the hunger strike, escaped to France in 1990 and eventually settled in the United States. As to what extent the Tiananmen Square protests affected government policy and acted as a catalyst for real change, the answer is: very little. The government continued its repressive policies and, even today, the subject of the student protests of 1989 is a taboo subject in the media. The notion of-freedom of speech in China remains elusive.