SAN FRANCISCO--The Voice of Hope radio program, “Voice of San Francisco Bay Area” interviewed Bao Tong, former Chinese Communist Party Central Committee member and executive secretary of former Party Chief Zhao Ziyang.

Announcer: Greetings, Mr. Bao Tong! We are very happy to have you with us today at our lunch break talk show.

Bao: Greetings.

A: Thank you. We have been worried that you might not be able to get on our program.

Bao: It’s a pleasure to be here.

A: Well, we’re glad you could make it. Currently the Chinese top leadership figures are in talks right now. We would like you to talk about the situation in China. Some recent media reports talked about some strange things; for example Jiang Zemin, not Hu Jintao, was the first to walk into the leadership meetings. Do you think this is strange? Many people think Hu should be in the front.

Bao: I don’t think it is strange or it is something serious. It really makes no difference who is in the front. Of course, the president could be in the front, which might be more appropriate. Maybe the Consultative Conference Chairman, as the host, should be in the front. I don’t think who in the front is something important. Some might care a lot, but as a commoner I don’t.

A: You, as a commoner, may not care, but you live in Beijing. What is your opinion on the leadership change that happened over a year ago? Do you think the power transfer from Jiang Zemin to Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao is now complete?

Bao: Oh, this question is too specialized and should be addressed to someone in the know. I am an outsider, probably even less knowledgeable than most common people.

A: Is that because you have a hard time to get on the Internet?

Bao: China has probably the best Internet firewall and monitoring in the world.

A: It is hard to get information then. Mr. Bao, personally, do you think the new leadership is different from Jiang Zemin?

Bao.: Ah! I think the new leadership obviously appears new to Chinese citizens and has a new image. I think they want to distance themselves from the old leadership because they know that the image of the old leadership may not be acceptable to the citizens. This is quite obvious, I think. I cannot say whether they are on a new track. I do not know the details and would not risk wild guesses.

A: I have read in some overseas media that Jiang is still the military chief and has the real power. Many things have not changed. The repression of dissidents in Beijing is still quite harsh. I wonder if you know about this.

Bao: Yes, I can feel that. The Internet censorship is very severe, very harsh. The harshness is quite tangible.

A: Recently several Internet writers have been arrested, including Du Daobin, a well-known writer. Do you know about his case?

Bao: Yes. I think this is contrary to what the National People’s Congress is promoting, for instance, the rule of law and respect for human rights. Arresting Internet writers is incongruent with the basic principles of the current People’s Congress. I think Mr. Du is innocent and there is no reason to arrest him. The prosecutors said there was not enough evidence, and I agree with them.

A: When we interviewed, Mr. Liu Xiaobo and Mr. Zhao Dagong, both famous Chinese writers, we considered the possibility that Du was arrested for his article, “My Conscience Does Not Allow Me to Remain Silent,” in which he expressed his opposition to the persecution of Falun Gong. Mr. Liu also thought that the article could have exceeded the tolerance of the authorities, which led to Du’s arrest. What do you think?

Bao: I think recently Falun Gong has become a big problem in the Chinese society. I did not know Falun Gong at all upon my release from the Qincheng Prison.

A: You were in the Qincheng Prison for seven years, right?

Bao: Right. At the time when I got out of prison, I had never heard about Falun Gong. Later, there were over 10,000 practitioners who staged a peaceful petition in front of Zhongnanhai [Chinese government’s central compound]. The petition was triggered by Tianjin City’s ban of Falun Gong practices. What I know about the organization is fairly limited. I learned that most practitioners are poor and do not have enough money to see doctors. They are peasants, unemployed, and elderly. Unlike officials, they do not have medical insurance, and when they are sick qigong is the only recourse. They are unfortunate, innocent, poor and weak citizens. When their practices were banned in Tianjin, someone in Beijing had the compassion to ask for government intervention to restore their rights. I heard that in the beginning the Chinese Communist Party Executive Office announced that the government never intended to ban Falun Gong.

A: Really?

Bao: The leaders promised practitioners they would be able to continue to practice, as long as they did not riot. This is not hearsay. I read the CCP Executive Office announcement in People’s Daily. I thought they handled it wonderfully and this should have led to a peaceful resolution. Unfortunately later, the announcement seemed to have been annulled because a great leader considered Falun Gong a cult. Therefore, the National People’s Congress of China passed a resolution, a decision, and a law to ban cults. I am afraid it was not done in the spirit of law. How can an organization become a criminal? What did the organization do that violated the law? Only people commit crimes. Suppose I had set fire or murdered someone, I would be personally responsible, not any organization that I happen to belong to. Later they said that Falun Gong was a cult because some people in Falun Gong committed suicide. The evidence was really flimsy in my opinion. From what I know, numerous Chinese Communist Party members have committed suicide ever since Mao Zedong launched a series of purges and infightings. Even Gao Gang, a CCP Politburo member, attempted suicide twice before succeeding. How can anyone say CCP is a cult because a politburo member committed suicide? Some practitioners might be sick, pessimistic, desperate, suicidal or psychotic. Even if all these were true, they should not be used as excuses to ban Falun Gong. I think there is insufficient evidence to label an organization with tens of millions of members a cult. I consider these millions of practitioners exemplary Chinese citizens. They should have medical insurance and be entitled to get medical care. Unfortunately most of them have neither. They had to use the often inexpensive and yet quite effective qigong. There is nothing wrong with that. If things went as the CCP Executive Office had announced and the authorities had not banned them and let them continue to practice, the appeals at Tiananmen would have been a very positive thing.

I think someone just wanted to make trouble out of nothing. Or probably it was just a bad move. Now it is no longer simply a qigong practice issue and has evolved into a civil rights issue. Actually I am not a practitioner and have no relation to Falun Gong at all. However, I think it is inappropriate [to persecute Falun Gong]. It is extremely rare for a state to use law to prohibit citizens from using a simple method to improve their health. This has rarely been seen throughout the history of the world.