No más refugiados

Las circunstancias que rodean salida de Guangcheng de la Embajada de Washington en Pekín son confusas y apunta a que ni unos ni otros van a revelar ni las negociaciones ni trasfondo en el que se desarrolló el abandono de la sede diplomática por el disidente ciego. Pero todo apunta a que China ha trazado una línea roja a Estados Unidos que pasa por impedir el refugio de sus disidentes. “Quiero irme y quiero irme lo antes posible”, dijo Chen Guangcheng, de 40 años, a la cadena CNN desde el hospital donde fue ingresado tras salir de la Embajada para tratarse el daño que se hizo en un pie al escapar de su arresto domiciliario. Chen aseguró que teme por su vida, pese a que la secretaria de Estado Hillary Clinton indicó que el disidente había dejado la sede “por su propia voluntad”. Por encima de los miedos de Chen, se encuentra el convencimiento de los líderes de las dos grandes potencias del siglo XXI, de que están condenados a entenderse. Por ello, no parecen dispuestos a consentir que sus relaciones bilaterales sean rehenes de ningún refugiado. Cuanto más se afianza Pekín en su liderazgo mundial menos permite los reproches de Washington sobre que no respeta los derechos humanos. El activista ciego fue acogido en la Embajada el jueves pasado tras huir de su arresto domiciliario y colgar en YouTube un vídeo en el que denunciaba a las autoridades de su provincia natal de Shandong por corruptas y por apalearle a él y a su mujer. Chen pedía al primer ministro Wen Jiabao que interviniera y protegiera a su familia. Es la segunda vez en poco más de dos meses que un ciudadano chino recurre a la protección estadounidense para defenderse de autoridades locales. A principios de febrero, fue Wang Lijun, antiguo jefe de policía de Chongqing y exbrazo derecho de Xilai, exjefe del Partido Comunista Chino en esa municipalidad, quien se refugió en el consulado de EEUU en Chengdu por amenazas de muerte de Bo y de su esposa Gu Kailai, ahora detenida como sospechosa del asesinato del hombre de negocios británico Neil Heywood. Aunque todo son conjeturas sobre el refugio de Wang, lo único claro es que no llegó a permanecer en el consulado ni 48 horas. Los diplomáticos estadounidenses convencieron a Wang de que se entregara a agentes del Gobierno central, que se lo llevaron a un paradero desconocido. Distintos analistas sostienen que Wang lavó la “ropa sucia” de Chongqing en el consulado, que originó no solo la caída del poderoso Bo Xilai y de su esposa, sino también un enorme malestar en Pekín por haber inmiscuido a Estados Unidos en los asuntos internos de China. El Gobierno chino no ha hecho la más mínima declaración sobre la petición de asilo de Wang. En cuanto a Chen, guardó un absoluto silencio hasta que el activista volvió a pisar suelo chino. El portavoz Ministerio de Exteriores, Liu Weimin, aseguró que había sido “una injerencia inaceptable en los asuntos internos de China” y exigió al Gobierno estadounidense “que se disculpe” por haber permitido la entrada de un ciudadano en su sede “por medios irregulares”. Liu reconoció que “China está muy molesta por este incidente” (…..)

Link: http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2012/05/02/actualidad/1335977209_416917.html

Acerca de ignaciocovelo
Consultor Internacional

8 Responses to No más refugiados

  1. (Autoria) Comentario del Prof. Uziel Nogueira: La guerra psicológica en contra China ingresa en la etapa de los refugiados políticos. El episodio Chen Guangcheng es el mas reciente pero, posiblemente, no sera el ultimo. De golpe, los consulados norteamericanos en territorio chino son santuarios para disidentes políticos de alto perfil mediático o funcionarios involucrados en causas judiciales de malversación de fondos públicos. La exposición mediática de los disidentes sirve de paño de fondo para exponer, a nivel global, posibles debilidades del Politburo, órgano máximo del Partido Comunista Chino. La corrupción en el manejo de fondos públicos es el blanco de la campana mediática.

    http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2012/05/02/actualidad/1335977209_416917.html

  2. Chen Guangcheng, the blind dissident lawyer at the heart of a diplomatic crisis between China and the United States, telephoned in to a Congressional hearing on Thursday to plead for help in leaving his country. Via a cellphone held up to a microphone at the hearing, Mr. Chen, speaking in Chinese, said: “I want to come to the U.S. to rest. I have not had a rest in 10 years. I’m concerned most right now with the safety of my mother and brothers. I really want to know what’s going on with them.” Mr. Chen, according to the English translation of his comments, also asked to meet with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who was in Beijing. “I hope I can get more help from her,” he said. “Also, I want to thank her face-to-face.” The call, apparently made from Mr. Chen’s Beijing hospital room from which American officials have been barred, was another dramatic turn in a case that had for a short time looked like a deft achievement to secure Mr. Chen’s safety by American diplomats. That achievement has unraveled, leaving the Obama administration open to attacks from rights activists and Republicans that it had failed to adequately protect Mr. Chen after he left the sanctuary of the United States Embassy here on Wednesday. Mitt Romney, the presumptive Republican candidate for president, accused the Obama administration of rushing to complete the deal before Mrs. Clinton arrived for the high level meetings and failing “to put in place the kind of verifiable measures that would assure the safety of Mr. Chen and his family.” “If these reports are true,” Mr. Romney said as he campaigned in Virginia, “this is a dark day for freedom and it’s a day of shame for the Obama administration.” Mr. Chen’s dramatic reversal from wanting to stay in China after his escape nearly two weeks ago from harsh house arrest in eastern China and his six-day stay at the American Embassy left the administration struggling to create a new solution that would satisfy Mr. Chen, and be amenable to the Chinese government. A key question facing the Obama administration will be the reaction of the Chinese government if Mr. Chen insists on leaving China. If Mr. Chen requested asylum in the United States, he would need a passport and must apply for a visa. Another possibility would be Mr. Chen leaving China and going to a third country. On Thursday, his lawyer said that a proposal for a temporary visit to the United States by Mr. Chen and his family was being considered, a possible face-saving way out of the diplomatic standoff. Earlier, Mr. Chen suggested leaving the country with Mrs. Clinton. “My fervent hope is that it would be possible for me and my family to leave for the U.S. on Hillary Clinton’s plane,” he said in an interview with the Daily Beast (…..)

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/world/asia/chen-guangcheng-us-embassy-china-threatened.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1#

  3. Professor Uziel Nogueira says: The Guangcheng’s affair has turned into a Chinese version of a Latin soap opera. A possible international public relations’s coup is rapidly going awry. There are only downsides for the US wherever you look into this mess. At this juncture, it is impossible to know which team (US or China) Mr. Guangcheng is playing for.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/world/asia/chen-guangcheng-us-embassy-china-threatened.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1#

  4. Professor Uziel Nogueira says: As the saga of Chen’s develops in front the world media, a clearer picture emerges from this messy episode. Clearly, a gamble (that did not pay off) was taken by the Obama administration thinking, perhaps, about the presidential election. US diplomats acted too hastily in bringing in Mr. Chen to the embassy in Beijing, considered American territory. At that point, the spotlight of the world media was on the White House that faced two exclusionary outcomes. Bring in Mr Chen to the US and give a demonstration of tour de force against the main adversary. Return Mr. Chen to the Chinese authorities and lose face. Things got complicated for the Obama administration because China is also in election year. The new Chinese leadership is getting ready to take power in the next few months. Thinking about their domestic audience, the decision making process of the Chinese authorities was predictable. They decided to play hard ball and draw a line in the sand. Political dissidents is a domestic affair and foreign interference will not be tolerated. Mr. Chen was the last political dissident to seek refuge at the US embassy. The authorities even allowed him to make a long distance call to the US Congress in Washington DC and plea for help. Nothing did or will happen. The Chen’s episode could become a pivotal moment in the bilateral relation of the US vis a vis an assertive China.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/04/world/asia/chen-guangcheng-us-embassy-china-threatened.html?pagewanted=1&_r=1#

  5. The past two months in China have revealed something profound about the outsized expectations that China and the United States have for each other and the often-feeble returns on what many call the most important bilateral relationship in the world. Many Chinese place the United States on a pedestal that looms even higher from the capital of a nation facing a deep crisis in belief. The Chinese vest the United States with a moral authority that Americans are flattered by but are often loath to accept. For its part, the United States, in need of a hand around the globe, wants China to start acting like a superpower. But the Chinese — for tactical reasons or otherwise — reject the responsibilities inherent in big-power status even as they, too, are beguiled by the attention. Ever since aggressive young U.S. merchants first washed up on China’s shores and earned the sobriquet “the new people,” the two sides have expected great things from each other. But over the 229 years that Americans and Chinese have interacted, they have rarely been satisfied. And yet irrationally, almost magnetically, they keep coming back to each other for more (…..)

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/chen-guangcheng-case-shows-outsize-expectations-of-us-china-diplomacy/2012/05/03/gIQALEB1zT_story.html

  6. The Future Belongs to the Flexible: (…..) We have entered what I like to call a “G-Zero” world: one in which no single nation (not even the U.S.) or alliance of governments (certainly not the G-7 or G-20) possesses the political and economic muscle to drive an international agenda. In this new decentralized global order, growth isn’t enough. A country also must have resilience—the power to pivot. Which countries are best positioned to pivot deftly in this emerging world order? (…..)

    http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304811304577365990370899520.html

  7. China and the United States reached a deal Friday that calls for the dissident Chen Guangcheng to travel to the United States with his family, in what appeared to be a resolution to an eight-day diplomatic crisis that had threatened to strain the relationship between the two countries and left the Obama administration open to attacks from human rights activists and political opponents at home. The accord, rushed on the last full day of the visit to China by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, enabled her to salvage a trip tarnished by Mr. Chen’s rejection of an arrangement forged earlier in the week by United States diplomats that called for him to remain in China. At a news conference here, however, Mrs. Clinton spoke cautiously about a definitive outcome. “We are encouraged by the progress we have seen today,” she said. “But there is more work to be done.” Moments after Mrs. Clinton finished speaking, the State Department spokeswoman, Victoria Nuland, released a statement saying that China was expected to issue travel documents to Mr. Chen “expeditiously” and that the United States would speed visa requests by his wife and two children. Mr. Chen, a self-taught lawyer who is blind, has been offered a fellowship at New York University, according to Jerome A. Cohen, a New York lawyer and expert on Chinese law who has advised Mr. Chen since his escape from house arrest nearly two weeks ago. The statement was the coda to what was, by all appearances, a carefully choreographed series of declarations by Mr. Chen, the Chinese government and American officials that committed all three parties to a mutually agreeable settlement of Mr. Chen’s future. But the arrangement was unlikely to silence a fusillade of accusations that the Obama administration had bungled Mr. Chen’s case by essentially handing him over to the Chinese authorities earlier this week, without ironclad assurances that he would be safe. And it only underscored the degree to which Chinese violations of human rights remain a lightning rod in the two nations’ ever more intertwined relationship, despite Washington’s best efforts to the contrary. It was not clear when Mr. Chen and his family would be able to leave China, senior American officials said, but he would not be allowed to join Mrs. Clinton, as he had requested, on her departure for Bangladesh and India on Saturday. Still, the Americans appeared confident that the Chinese would abide by the accord, largely because Beijing was eager to see Mr. Chen go (…..)

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/world/asia/chen-guangcheng-study-abroad-china.html?pagewanted=1&tntemail1=y&_r=1&emc=tnt

  8. Professor Uziel Nogueira says: The US human rights policy occasionally generates unintended consequences. Could the Chen’s affair be a prelude of a Chinese version of the Mariel boatlift of 1980? According to Wikipedia: “Mariel boatlift was a mass emigration of Cubans who departed from Cuba’s Mariel Harbor for the United States between April 15 and October 31, 1980. The Cuban government announced that ANYONE who wanted TO LEAVE could do so. The exodus started to have NEGATIVE political implications for Jimmy Carter when it was discovered that a NUMBER OF THE EXILES had been released from Cuban JAILS AND MENTAL HEALTH FACILITIES. The boatlift was ended by mutual agreement between the two governments involved in October 1980. By that point, as many as 125,000 Cubans had made the journey to Florida.” Cuba population is 6 million people. Chinese population is 1.3 billion. The Chinese authorities would not do a similar thing that Castro did in 1980. Would they?

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/05/05/world/asia/chen-guangcheng-study-abroad-china.html?pagewanted=1&tntemail1=y&_r=1&emc=tnt

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: