Read history before referencing it

People walk on a crosswalk at the Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China, on June 6, 2019. PHOTO: EPA-EFE

Mr Paul Chan Poh Hoi seeks to put the "ghost of Tiananmen" to rest, arguing that military suppression of demonstrators in Beijing was "necessary" and marked a "turning point for national rejuvenation" (Tiananmen crackdown was necessary, June 13).

The argument is that the Chinese Communist Party was right to crush the 1989 pro-democracy movement in Beijing for political stability and economic growth.

Mr Chan's judgment is his to make, but it is built on false premises.

First, he claims that the Tiananmen demonstrations could have "developed into another Boxer Rebellion" if "allowed to fester". The 1899 to 1901 Boxer Rebellion is used here as a byword for unnecessary disorder and destruction.

This analogy is poorly chosen. The Boxer Rebellion was a nationalist uprising in support of the Qing dynasty, then the government of China, against foreign imperial powers.

By Mr Chan's logic, it was right for the troops of Britain, France, Germany, Japan and Russia to bloodily suppress the uprising, occupy cities, and massacre villagers - in the name of political order and economic growth.

No serious student of late imperial Chinese history would make such a claim.

Second, Mr Chan contends that Tiananmen was a turning point for national rejuvenation, while also lauding China's 30 years of incredible development.

Counting backwards, one notices that the starting point of this economic take-off was 1978, not 1989.

It was Deng Xiaoping's policy of reform and opening that kick-started the Chinese ascent.

If 1989 had been a turning point, it was a turn backwards against reform. In 1992, the elderly Deng had to make a Southern Tour to rally support for his reform, against party conservatives emboldened by the Tiananmen incident.

Finally, Mr Chan says that there is no cover-up of Tiananmen in China. It is easy to falsify this claim. Try searching "Tiananmen massacre" on Google and Baidu, and compare the hits.

In evaluating the past, one can never observe counterfactuals. But, in forming judgments, we should know the actual historical record as it stands.

Seow Yongzhi

Join ST's Telegram channel and get the latest breaking news delivered to you.

A version of this article appeared in the print edition of The Straits Times on June 19, 2019, with the headline Read history before referencing it. Subscribe