Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident: Difference between revisions

Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident
Charred remains of a person lying on the ground Charred remains of Liu Chunling after the incident
Location	Tiananmen Square, Beijing,  China
Date	23 January 2001 14:30 (UTC+8)
Attack type	self-immolation
Deaths	2
Injured	3

The Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident took place in the historic and iconic Tiananmen Square in central Beijing, on the eve of Chinese New Year on 23 January 2001. The incident is disputed: the official Chinese Communist Party state run press agency, Xinhua News Agency reported that five members of Falun Gong, a banned but popular qigong movement based on meditation, which is also known as "Falun Dafa", set themselves on fire in protest. A week later, the Chinese government television station, China Central Television (CCTV), broadcast a program showing a video of the incident; the number of victims was increased from five to seven.

The Falun Dafa Information Center denied that the self-immolators were practitioners, on the grounds that the movement's teachings explicitly forbid killing and view suicide as a sin and that victims self-immolators where not known as having practiced Falun Gong.^[1]. The claims of the Falun Dafa information Center were supported by the investigation of Washington Post reporter, Philip Pan, who days after the incident, traveled to the hometown of two of the alleged self-immolators to investigate, finding no one had ever seen them practice Falun Gong. The Falun Dafa Information Center alledged that the incident was staged and Falun Gong-affiliated TV company published a program, False Fire.^[2] . deconstructing the CCTV video footage of the self-immolation incident.

The five people were part of a group of seven who had travelled to the square together. One of them, Liu Chunling, later identified as a prostitute by Washington Post reporter Philip P. Pan^{[citation needed]}, died at Tiananmen and another, her 12-year-old daughter, Liu Siying, died in hospital several weeks after; three survived. A CNN crew present at the scene witnessed the five setting themselves ablaze and had just started filming when police intervened and detained the crew.^[3] The incident received international news coverage, and video footage was extensively and repeatedly broadcast throughout the People's Republic of China by China Central Television (CCTV), which showed images of Liu Siying burning and interviews with the others in which they stated their belief that self-immolation would lead them to paradise.^[4] The video was questioned by a Falun Gong-affiliated TV company in their own program, False Fire.^[2] The Falun Dafa Information Center, along with journalist Danny Schechter, claimed that the incident was staged to turn public opinion against the practice.^[5][6]

Time magazine reported that the Chinese government's media campaign against Falun Gong gained significant traction following the act.^[7] Posters, leaflets and videos were produced, detailing the supposed detrimental effects of Falun Gong; the authorities ordered regular anti-Falun Gong classes to be scheduled in schools to highlight the dangers of the practice.^[4][8][9] Human Rights Watch (HRW) believed the incident was among one of the most difficult stories for reporters in Beijing at the time to report on because of a lack of independent information available.^[10] Time magazine and Professor David Ownby of the University of Montreal^[11] remarked it was possible for misguided practitioners to have taken it upon themselves to demonstrate in this manner.^[7][12] Barend ter Haar, sinologist at Leiden University^[13] and Francesco Sisci, Asia editor of La Stampa, believe the event was an authentic protest by practitioners, but that the Chinese government's botched handling of it made it look like state propaganda.^[14][15]

Three of the survivors plus two other people accused of being involved in the incident were put on trial in mid-2001 for intentional homicide; four of the five were found guilty and given sentences ranging from seven years to life. One of the accused, Liu Baorong, was exempted from sentence as the court said she had "acknowledged her crime".^[16] Two of the survivors, Hao Huijun and her daughter Chen Guo, were totally disfigured and did not appear in court.^[17]

Falun Gong, a new religious movement based on the meditative practice of qigong, was founded in the People's Republic of China by Li Hongzhi in 1992 and by the mid-1990s had attracted millions of followers.^[18] When its teachings, influenced by Taoism and Buddhism,^[19] were denounced as unscientific by notable Chinese sceptics such as Sima Nan and scientist He Zuoxiu, practitioners took to protesting any negative coverage. Following one such demonstration in Tianjin where a number of practitioners were arrested, more than ten thousand practitioners congregated at Communist Party of China headquarters in Zhongnanhai on 25 April 1999.^[20][21] From 25 April to July, about 300 Falun Gong demonstrations were held around the country. On 22 July the same year, a decision was made by the Chinese government to impose a nationwide ban on the group.^[22]

Following the ban, Tiananmen Square, which has been the central point for several major historical protests, was one of the prime locations where the Falun Gong leadership expected practitioners to demonstrate despite government deterrence, and by 25 April 2000, one year later, more than 30,000 practitioners had been arrested.^[23] Seven hundred Falun Gong followers were arrested during a demonstration in the Square on 1 January 2001.^[24] According to Time, a Falun Gong website editorial instructed followers to step up demonstrations, "especially in Tiananmen Square"; founder Li Hongzhi urged followers to immobilise the police and other "evil scoundrels" through use of supernatural powers.^[7] Jensen and Weston (2006) noticed a marked change in the tone of Li Hongzhi's messages following the ban: practitioners who remained steadfast against the oppression would survive the apocalypse while those who succumbed to pressure would not. Those who died or had suffered were promised "consummation", or enlightenment.^[25] Specifically, Li wrote that "any fear is itself a barrier that prevents you from reaching consummation",^[26] that "the process of enduring is but a brief moment", and that those who "have hidden themselves ... have sided in their understanding with evil beings."^[27]

On 1 January 2001, Li published "Beyond the Limits of Forbearance", in which he wrote that persecution of the Fa – an expression used by Falun Gong to describe itself – by "evil" – meaning the Chinese Communist Party – could no longer be tolerated: "Forbearance [as taught by Buddha] does not mean tolerating evil beings. [...] Completely eliminating the evil is for Fa-rectification, and not a matter of personal cultivation. In personal cultivation, there is usually no going beyond the limits of Forbearance."^[28][29]

On 23 January 2001, the eve of Chinese New Year, five people on Tiananmen Square poured gasoline over their clothes and set themselves on fire; another two people were prevented from igniting the gasoline.^[8][30]

A CNN film crew, who were there on a routine check for a possible Falun Gong protest,^[31] observed a man sitting down on the pavement north-east of the Monument to the People's Heroes at the centre of the square.^[3] He proceeded to pour gasoline over himself and set himself ablaze.^[3] Police officers on the square noticed what was happening, quickly approached the man and extinguished the flames.^[3] Shortly afterwards, another four people on the square set themselves alight.^[3] The CNN crew was filming these events when military police stepped in and detained the crew.^[3] The authorities then put out the flames consuming the other four people's clothing.^[3] A police van came to collect the badly burnt man, and two ambulances arrived almost 25 minutes later to collect the other four.^[3] The square was completely closed,^[32] and security was tight the next day, the most important of the traditional Chinese holidays; police monitored public access to the square for the New Year celebrations, had fire extinguishers ready, and prevented Falun Gong members from opening banners.^[3]

Of the five people who set light to themselves, one, Liu Chunling, died at the scene; another, her 12-year-old daughter, Liu Siying, died in Beijing hospital two months later, in March;^[33] the other three were left severely disfigured.

Though western media were not allowed to investigate the incident, the official Chinese Communist Party state run press agency, Xinhua News Agency gave the participants' details as follows:^[34]

The Chinese authorities stated that the seven people who had come to Tiananmen Square with the intention of committing suicide were all from the city of Kaifeng in Henan province. The state-run Xinhua News Agency asserted that the self-immolators were "avid practitioners" of Falun Gong who had taken up the practice between 1994 and 1997, and that they fantasised during the preceding week about "how wonderful it would be to enter heaven".^[34] Six of them reportedly took the train on 16 January, meeting Chen Guo, the daughter of one of them, upon their arrival in Beijing. The seven agreed to light themselves in different parts of the Square at 2:30 pm on the designated day with gasoline smuggled there in plastic soda bottles; each had been armed with two lighters in case one would fail.^[34] According to the China Association For Cultic Studies website, Wang Jindong stated afterwards that the group arrived in Tiananmen Square by two taxis, and were dropped off at the south of the Great Hall of the People, from where they walked to the spot where they would ignite themselves. Wang said he was approached by police as he was splitting open the soda bottles, and ignited himself hurriedly without assuming the lotus position.^[35] Liu Yunfang explained that the police were able to stop him burning himself because he had not attained the required spiritual level.^[30]

Xinhua released brief details of the incident to foreign media the same evening.^[36] According to Human Rights Watch (HRW), the lack of independent information and difficulties in ascertaining the extent of control of the information made the incident one of the most difficult stories for reporters in Beijing to report.^[10] Schechter notes that sensitive subjects in the Chinese press are almost never reported on a timely basis;^[5] the usual protocol is approval by several party officials before publication.^[31] Xinhua then distributed a fuller press release seven days later on Tuesday, 30 January,^[37] in response to other media reports on the incident.^[30]

Filming by the CNN crew on Tiananmen Square was stopped by the police almost immediately after it began.^[31] Articles in the Yangcheng Evening News and the Southern Daily reported that police had evidence that a few foreign reporters had advance knowledge of the incident, and suggested that such reporters could be charged with "instigating and abetting a suicide."^[31][38] State media claimed surveillance video showed six or seven reporters from CNN, the Associated Press and Agence France-Presse arriving just 10 minutes before the self-immolations took place; however, all three agencies denied advance knowledge of the incident—AP and AFP said they had no reporters in the square at the time, while CNN's chief news executive, Eason Jordan, said the CNN crew were there on a routine check for a possible Falun Gong protest.^[31]

On 31 January, a 30-minute special edition of the current affairs program Forum broke the news to the Chinese public.^[39] China Central Television aired footage, said to be taken by nearby surveillance cameras, of five people in flames.^[5]

Falun Gong alleged that the news articles and television programs had been engineered.^[40] Subsequently, Falun Gong-affiliated^[41] New Tang Dynasty Television produced a program called False Fire,^[42] claiming a number of inconsistencies in the accounts from various state sources compared with the video broadcast nationally.^[43] Issues and discrepancies mentioned included why the participants' hair and the gasoline-filled bottles did not catch fire, the presence of fire extinguishers, whether Wang Jindong was sitting or standing when he shouted, and the medical treatment and ultimate death of the 12-year-old girl.^[2][44] In a frame-by-frame replay of parts of the state media footage, the film commentary argued that a man wearing military clothing struck Liu Chunling on the head with an object, thus causing her death.^[45][46] Falun Gong lobby group, the World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong, stated that the Speech Processing Laboratory at National Taiwan University analysed the broadcasts, and claimed that the first 'Wang Jindong' on CCTV was not the same person who appeared the second and third times.^[47]

Chinese government media reported that close-up shots in its video footage came from confiscated CNN tapes, but Philip Pan of the Washington Post was suspicious of the positioning of the cameras, and the fact that the close-up shots shown on Chinese television were taken without police interference.^[31] In addition, overhead surveillance camera footage seemed to show a man filming the scene using a small hand-held camera, rather than a large camera of the type used for TV news reporting.^[31] The Age commented that the "ready availability of fire-extinguishers and official TV teams and the lack of verification about the victims" raised questions about whether the movement was involved.^[48] However, John Gittings of The Guardian noted it was common practice in many countries for police camera operators to be on hand when a public disturbance is anticipated; the police used small-scale fire-extinguishers of the type carried in public vehicles, many of which are routinely on the square.^[16] Schechter noted that state media uncharacteristically released the story at once, yet the footage was finally aired one week later.^[49] Barend ter Haar believes that the government may have fabricated a video of their own when they realised the mediatic potential of the suicides.^[14]

Falun Gong stated that there had been no incidents of self-immolation among Falun Gong practitioners in the world before 23 January 2001. However, the China Association for Cultic Studies published details of 3 instances of Falun Gong followers who they claim committed self-immolation prior to 2001, the earliest one in 1997, and 3 further instances said to have taken place subsequent to the incident in Tiananmen Square.^[50] Academics such as Chang (1991), Rahn (2001), Lindsey (2001) and Li Cheng (1997) recognised that suicide is a traditional gesture of protest in China;^[51] ter Haar (2001) postulated that former Buddhists may have brought with them the "respectable Buddhist tradition of self-immolation as a sacrifice to the Buddha".^[14]

The Guardian commented that Li Hongzhi's new scripture released on 1 January 2001, Beyond the Limits of Forbearance, had confused his supporters.^[28] Matthew Forney in Time magazine believed the message had spread into China via the internet and informal networks of followers, and reached more radical practitioners there.^[7] Falun Gong headquarters in New York admitted ten days after the release of the scripture that "certain disciples had some extreme interpretations [and thought] we are going to resort to violence", and asserted that Li's message merely meant time had come to let the truth be known about China's atrocities.^[28] Jensen and Weston remarked it was clear from Li Hongzhi's messages that he advocated martyrdom over prudence, and that "if the Chinese authorities lit the fire, Li just as clearly fanned the flames."^[25] David Ownby believes that the brief message was "difficult to interpret": it somewhat resembled a "call to arms" against what Li described as "evil beings who no longer have any human nature or righteous thoughts". Ownby said nobody he talked to had seen it as a "green light" for violent action;^[39] "[b]ut a practitioner at the end of his or her rope in China could certainly see [the statements] as an endorsement for martyrdom, and perhaps choose his or her own means to achieve that."^[52]

Following the incident, the details of why the individuals were involved has been and remains the subject of dispute between representatives of Falun Gong, the Chinese government, and other observers. According to the Hong Kong NGO Information Center for Human Rights and Democracy, all of the would-be self-immolators, except 12-year-old Liu Siying, had previously protested for Falun Gong in Tiananmen Square.^[4] Xinhua News Agency reported that Huo Xiuzhen, Liu Chunling's adoptive mother, spoke of her daughter's "obsession with Falun Gong", her "worshipping of Li Hongzhi", and how Liu would teach her daughter Falun Gong.^[53] Liu's neighbours interviewed by the International Herald Tribune (IHT) stated that she was not a native of Kaifeng, worked in a nightclub, and beat her mother and daughter. None of the interviewed had ever seen her practise Falun Gong.^[4] Falun Gong disputes that Liu was a practitioner because, by beating her stepmother and child, she engaged in conduct that was "not in accordance with a practitioner's [high moral] standard."^[54]

Doubts about strident practitioners of Falun Gong revolved around the use of suicide as a form of protest – the Falun Dafa Information Center said, "Mr. Li Hongzhi ... has explicitly stated that suicide is a sin."^[1] Falun-Gong-related commentators pointed out that the main participants' account of the incident and other aspects of the participants' behaviour were inconsistent with the teachings of Falun Dafa.^[43] The Laogai Research Foundation, founded by Chinese dissident Harry Wu, suggested that an event "staged or allowed to happen by China's government in order to discredit the Falun Gong" was "hardly a far-fetched hypothesis."^[38] Government sources reported Liu Siying had had a tracheotomy. Speaking through approved media outlets, she said that her own mother told her to set herself on fire to reach the "heavenly golden kingdom".^[5] Schechter noted that the CNN producer "standing just fifty feet away" did not see any children. He doubted that the child would have been able to speak to the Chinese media so soon after the operation.^[49] University of South Florida masters student Noah Porter commented that other religions have extremists too, and that even if the participants had been practitioners, they were not necessarily representative.^[51]

CNN, whose crew was on the scene, reported that four of the self-immolators were seen in flames, with their hands held "in a classic Falun Gong meditation pose", drawing a complaint from the Falun Gong movement.^[28] Time reported that a Beijing arm of Falun Gong strongly suggested the self-immolators were practitioners, yet the Falun Dafa Association in New York categorically denied the incident had anything to do with its practitioners.^[55] Francesco Sisci, Asia editor of La Stampa, wrote in the Asia Times: "the sect first tried to deny the episode and then argued that it was staged by the government. But no one believed that the government could have paid a mother to torch herself and her daughter, or that she was so loyal to the Communist Party that she pretended to be a Falungong member and kill herself and her only daughter, even if Falungong master Li Hongzhi forbade suicide ..."^[15] Time concurred, adding that the movement had been caught off-guard, and its leadership's damage control proved to be inadequate.^[7] It added that the "lack of solidarity" was contributing to the sense of desperation of Mainland Chinese practitioners who may feel out of touch with the exiled leadership.^[55] Other observers, including Ownby and ter Haar, as well as Gittings were likewise open to the possibility that the act was committed by Falun Gong practitioners; Gittings reported that some observers believed it was possible that the self-immolators acted in desperation and confusion.^[28] Likewise, Ownby believed that they may have been practitioners who "discovered and practised Falun Gong on their own (and badly) in the post-suppression period, and ... decided to make the ultimate sacrifice."^[12] Other human rights activists said the five who set themselves on fire did so to protest the government's crackdown on Falun Gong.^[4]

The New York Times stated that conflicting claims were still difficult to assess "[w]ith propaganda streaming in from seemingly opposite ends of the universe ... especially since the remaining Falun Gong practitioners have been driven underground." It noted however that one of the self-immolators was able to "fluidly perform" Falun Gong's signature slow-motion exercises in front of Western media.^[56] Sisci commented that the police committed a mistake by seizing journalists at Tiananmen – "independently filmed news footage of the proceedings could have been the best proof of Falungong madness. Instead, when the government reported the episode, it looked like propaganda."^[15]

The incident continues to serve as a significant reason for disputing the methods of Falun Gong in China. Posters, leaflets and videos were produced, detailing the supposed detrimental effects of Falun Gong practice. In China's schools, regular anti-Falun Gong classes were scheduled on the orders of the authorities;^[4] The media incited 8 million students to join the "Anti-Cult Action by the Youth Civilized Communities Across the Nation".^[8] Twelve million children submitted writings disapproving of the practice.^[8]

On 16 February, Tan Yihui, a 25-year-old "shoeshine man" from Hunan, committed self-immolation in west Beijing in another apparent Falun Gong protest. Police said Tan's six-page suicide note indicated that he was a follower. Witnesses saw Tan pouring petrol over himself and igniting with a lighter. Xinhua said that the police arrived on scene in three minutes and extinguished the blaze, by which time Tan was already dead. Pictures of the charred body were broadcast on television. The Independent said that "the nationwide coverage [of the earlier self-immolations] gave believers such as Mr Tan all the incentive they needed to conduct copycat protests."^[57]

Within a month of the Tiananmen Square incident, authorities issued a glossy pamphlet entitled The whole story of the self-immolation incident created by Falun Gong addicts in Tiananmen Square, featuring colour photographs of charred bodies.^[8] The State Council's "Office for the Prevention and Handling of Evil Cults" declared after the event that it was now ready to form a united front with the global anti-cult struggle.^[8] The IHT reported that Chinese media were attacking Falun Gong and Li Hongzhi every day. Meetings took place in factories, offices, universities and schools to educate people about Falun Gong. The Government announced that religious leaders from across the country had delivered denunciations of Falun Gong. In Kaifeng, the post office issued an anti-Falun Gong postmark, and 10,000 people signed a petition denouncing the group.^[4]

Time reported that prior to the self-immolation incident, many Chinese had felt that Falun Gong posed no real threat, and that the state's crackdown had gone too far. After the event, however, China's media campaign against Falun Gong gained significant traction.^[7] The World Organization to Investigate the Persecution of Falun Gong reported that hostility toward Falun Gong from the general public escalated, the government had stepped up its campaign, and alleged that "hate crimes" targeting Falun Gong increased.^[58] One western diplomat commented that the public changed from sympathising with Falun Gong to siding with the Government, popular consensus seemingly shifted by human-interest stories and accounts of rehabilitation efforts of former practitioners.^[59] Østergaard believes that, in retrospect, the New Year scripture was Li's greatest gift to the state, as the self-immolations marked a turning point which ended domestic support for the movement.^[60]

Five people involved in the incident were put on trial in mid-2001. The authorities named Liu Yunfang as the mastermind, and gave him a life sentence; Wang Jindong was given 15 years. Two others said to have been involved in organising the incident, a 49-year-old man named Xue Hongjun, and a 34-year-old Beijing woman named Liu Xiuqin who apparently provided the group with lodging and helped in the preparation of the incident, were sentenced to ten and seven years in prison respectively.^[17][61] Liu Baorong, who had suggested the group use Sprite bottles to transport the gasoline, escaped punishment, because her role in planning the event was minor and she had "acknowledged her crime".^[16][34] The Guardian reported that on the last day of the one-month trial, Xinhua had, by mid-morning, issued a full report of the verdicts; the People's Daily had produced its own editorial by the afternoon.^[16]

In a hacking incident, the False Fire video was successfully broadcast on Chinese television in 2002 in the city of Changchun, and interrupted the station's scheduled programming for 50 minutes.^[62] Liu Chengjun, a Falun Gong practitioner who hacked into the satellite feed, was arrested and sentenced to prison, where he died 21 months later.^[63][64]

In April 2002, one year after the incident, the Government acceded to requests for foreign press to interview the survivors in the presence of state officials.^[61] When asked why they set themselves on fire, Hao Huijun replied that she had realised the futility of writing letters and demonstrating by waving banners, "so finally, we decided ... to make a big event to show our will to the world. ... We wanted to show the government that Falun Gong was good."^[61] At the time of the interview, Chen Guo and her mother were still in the hospital, both having lost their hands, ears and noses. Chen had one eye covered by a flap of skin.^[61] Both her mother's eyes were covered with skin grafts. The fire had left Wang Jindong with scarred, leathery cheeks and blackened fingers. Wang said he felt "humiliated because of my stupidity and fanatical ideas."^[61] Liu Baorong, who did not set fire to herself, spent months in reform through labour and reeducation. The China Association For Cultic Studies quoted her saying: "I feel as if I am recovered from a serious disease."^[65] Liu Yunfang, who did not douse himself with gasoline, would serve out his sentence of life imprisonment for homicide; he steadfastly refused to renounce the Falun Dafa.^[66]

• falsefire.com (Falun Gong site)
• Facts.org.cn (Website of China Association For Cultic Studies)