ISSUE #70: The truth behind Tiananmen 1989.
It was the color revolution that failed, not the "massacre" that succeeded.
(This one is the longest I have written to this date. But it was worth it as I learned a lot during my research. I hope you will, too)
If you look at any Western media report about what happened on June 4, 1989 at Tiananmen Square in China, you’d see headlines like these:
First, let’s discuss what the West wants us to think about that day.
In the Western corporate press, June 4, 1989 is remembered as the day when the Chinese government committed a “genocide” against its own people. The Western narrative is that thousands of university students gathered at the Tiananmen Square demanding democracy were met with hostile response from the Chinese military and the military opened fire at the peaceful protesters which killed up to 1000 innocent participants.
Here’s what the US Secretary of Defense has to say about the matter:
This single tweet should have made everyone question the validity of the Tiananmen “massacre.” Why? Because it’s coming from the empire that violates human rights globally, let alone locally, and has no shame making hypocrite statements like the one above.
What if I tell you that June 4, 1989 was NOT the day when the Chinese government murdered thousands of its own people, but the day when the US engineered color revolution failed to overthrow the Chinese communist government? You’d be shocked, right? I was, too. Because for the past 33 years, we had to listen to the stories that were completely biased towards the Western narratives and it hurts when the lens of reality proves that we have been lied to.
Are you ready for one of your core beliefs to be challenged and shattered? Enjoy!
What do you mean by “Color Revolution”?
(You can skip directly to the next section if you want.)
Color revolution - described as anti-government protest movements which results in the overthrow of the national government - is a product made in the US which disguises the perfectly engineered uprisings as organic revolutions to topple the governments that do not act in the interests of the US empire.
Russia, China, Vietnam share the view that Color Revolutions are the “product of machinations by the US and other Western powers” and pose a threat to their public and national security.
Gene Sharp - an American political scientist - is the father of these “color revolutions.” Books have been written on his methods of starting a revolution. The man made an entire career out of the US/CIA regime change operations, from Yugoslavia to Ukraine to Syria to Venezuela.
All the “color revolutions” have the same formula: phony organizations - funded and advised by the US - use the local people as the basis for a political movement, run covert operations to make it seem like the demonstrators are being attacked by the government, and the biased Western press using that as a pretext to call out the removal of the “evil dictator” from power. They look like pure revolutions from the outside but gets exposed as the US-engineered coup attempt when investigated fairly.
What led to that day?
First, it’s important to understand that not only students but workers were also protesting for weeks prior to June 4, 1989. We need to go back to 1987 to understand the whole situation. So get your time machine ready and let’s go.
In 1987, in the post-cultural revolution era, many students started protesting in the universities to “further the reforms.” Their main concern was the liberalisation of the society, rather than that of economy. One example can be holding hands with someone who you were dating on campus in university, which was literally banned. But the Western media portrayed the whole situation as if they were protesting for radical economic or political reforms and Western-like economy.
Then why were the workers protesting? In 1988, inflation rose 26% in China which was the result of swift liberalisation of economy and transition to Western-like economy. So people were really suffering and they were protesting for the government to do something.
There are two important personalities in this story: Hu Yaobang and James Lilley.
Hu Yaobang was the Chairman and General Secretary of the CCP, and one of the leading members of “Boluan Fanzheng” campaign which literally means “To eliminate chaos, and return to normality.” The campaign was launched in 1977 and was meant to undo the chaos brought by the cultural revolution (1966-1976). He was very popular especially among the young people for his pro-reform ideas. After he died on 15 April, 1989, not only the students but people from different fields started gathering at Tiananmen Square only to mourn his death and thousands of people started to congregate in Beijing.
At peak, the number of demonstrators at Tiananmen was 100,000 and the West showed the situation as the Chinese people wanting the Communist Party to step down, which was further from truth as many demonstrators who loved Mao were also involved in the protests.
The protestors could be divided into different categories:
Some participants indeed wanted Western-like democracy as shown here:
Some student leaders wanted the massacre to happen and Chai Ling was one of them. In an interview, she said, “I wanted to tell them [students] that we were expecting bloodshed, that it would take a massacre, which would spill blood like a river through Tiananmen Square, to awaken the people. But how could I tell them this? How could I tell them that their lives would have to be sacrificed in order to win?”
The workers suffering from economic pain introduced by record high inflation.
Thugs and Provocateurs who were in minority, but could easily escalate tensions as they had access to guns and other weapons which they stole from military vehicles.
The US saw it as a perfect moment to engineer a coup against the Communist government of China, which is understandable because the US wanted to end the communist wave started by the Russian revolution in 1917. Five days after Yaobang’s death, James Lilley - who was a 30 year veteran from the CIA - was appointed as the US ambassador to China.
In a former testimony, he admitted that the US provided weapons to the Tibetan insurgents. So it’s not difficult to imagine what task he had to perform in this case.
An article from Vancouver Sun says the following: “The Central Intelligence Agency had sources among [Tiananmen Square] protesters” … and “For months before [the protests], the CIA had been helping student activists form the anti-government movement.” I was not amazed when I came to know this because whenever we find destabilization in the socialist countries, we’ll always find the CIA.
The help the CIA, there were two important personalities: George Soros and Zhao Ziyang.
George Soros has perfected the art of organizing grassroots movements all around the world. In 1986, he had donated $1 million to the Fund for the reform and Opening of China. Over the coming three years, Soros’ group trained many pro-democracy students who would be on the ground during the ‘89 protests. In 1988, National Endowment for Democracy - which is another regime change organization - also opened offices in China.
Who would all this? Zhao Ziyang. He was the Premier of China and the General Secretary of the CCP who helped Soros and allowed all the Western fake NGOs to open up their offices in China. Why was he supporting the Western powers? Because he wanted to overthrow Deng Xiaoping and take power himself, and transform China into a capitalist economy.
What exactly happened that day?
“As far as can be determined from the available evidence, NO ONE DIED that night in Tiananmen Square.”
The above quote is from Jay Mathews, the Washington Post’s Beijing Bureau Chief in 1989.
Let’s look at a few more examples when the Western press, surprisingly, uttered the truth about Tiananmen:
CBS News reporter, Richard Roth, published a report on June 4, 2009 in which he says, “We saw no bodies, injured people, ambulances or medical personnel — in short, nothing to even suggest, let alone prove, that a “massacre” had occurred in [Tiananmen Square].”
BBC reporter, James Miles, wrote in 2009, “I was one of the foreign journalists who witnessed the events that night. There was no massacre on Tiananmen Square.”
Many people refer to the brave “tank man” video when remembering “Tiananmen massacre,” but if you see the entire video, you see that the army didn’t harm the man in any way. If the soldiers’ intention was to kill people, they could have easily rolled the tank over him. But they didn’t.
Wikileaks - a nightmare for the US empire - released a classified document in which then-US Ambassador to China, James Lilley, talks about Chilean diplomat and his wife’s visit to Tiananmen on June 3-4. He writes: “THEY WERE ABLE TO ENTER AND LEAVE THE SQUARE SEVERAL TIMES AND WERE NOT HARASSED BY TROOPS. THE DIPLOMAT SAID THERE WERE NO MASS SHOOTINGS OF STUDENTS IN THE SQUARE OR AT THE MONUMENT.”
Propaganda involves not only exaggeration, but also omission.
The Western biased media never tells the public about tanks and military vehicles being set to flames like this one:
A number of protestors were armed with Molotov cocktails and guns. Wall Street Journal, in an article from June 5, 1989, put light on some of this violence: “Dozens of soldiers were pulled from trucks, severely beaten and left for dead. At an intersection west of the square, the body of a young soldier, who had been beaten to death, was stripped naked and hung from the side of a bus.”
Do you think the “peaceful” protestors could kill so many “armed” soldiers? Until the very end, the soldiers were unarmed.
Unarmed soldiers with protestors:
This was the climate for weeks. It’s important to know that there was no martial law until May 20 and no major clashes took place between soldiers and protestors. The protest went on smoothly from April 15, 1989 to May 20, 1989.
After the martial law was introduced on May 20, 1989, PLA troops having rudimentary riot gear were sent through Chang’an Avenue to clear the square.
On their way to the square, the troops were met with violent response from some of the demonstrators who were armed with Molotov cocktails and guns.
According to a WashingtonPost article from June 5th, 1989: “anti-government fighters had been organised into formations of 100-150 people.” “They were armed with Molotov cocktails and iron clubs, to meet the PLA who were still unarmed in the days prior to 4 June,” the article adds.
The official report of the Chinese government shows that more than 1000 military vehicles were burned by rioters, 200+ soldiers and policemen were murdered.
A massacre was needed to take down the communist party and when it didn’t happen as planned by the West, a narrative massacre was created according to which, the Chinese government killed 10,000 of its own countrymen. Because of the global influence of the Western corporate press, many people believe in the narrative massacre and those who control the narrative control the society.
My work is 100% supported by readers like YOU. If you like the idea of independent reporting, you can SUBSCRIBE to this newsletter for FREE, and receive an unbiased analysis of the International Affairs and the Western foreign policy. LONG LIVE THE TRUTH.