European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - March 11, 1990, Darmstadt, Hesse Page 10 a the stars and stripes Colum Santhony Lewis Bush has Zero to show for China forbearance w Hen president Bush made gestures last year to the tyrants who Rule China he won the support of two China scholars in this country. Michel Oksenberg of the University of Michigan and a. Doak Barnett of the Johns Hopkins school of advanced International studies defended Bush against his Many critics. Both men argued that the Bush policy would move the chinese leaders to ease their brutal repression. A we can Hope for renewed Progress toward political Barnett said. The argument has been tested since then in the reality of chinese political life and to put it politely it looks embarrassing. The Bush gestures have not produced a Kinder gentler chinese government. To the contrary Beijing has further tightened the screws. Compare the Wishful thinking with what has actually happened. Oksenberg writing in december in the new York l Imes listed some measures for Beijing to take in response to Bush. It should he said a Grant amnesty to demonstrators acknowledge that the events of june were a tragedy and halt the oppressive climate that now pervades Many universities and research ear Erom granting amnesty the chinese government has continued to pursue and imprison those involved in the democracy movement. It has acknowledged no wrong in the Tiana men Square massacre last june. The climate at universities is not less but More repressive the government has dismissed the head of China s leading Taw school for supporting the democracy movement. In Short Bush and his academic defenders have nothing to show for their forbearance toward the chinese Geron Toracy. Nothing that is by Way of human rights for the people of China a rights that other victims of totalitarianism have so strikingly gained in recent months. The failure is hardly surprising. Deng Xiaoping and his colleagues have never pretended to be humanitarians. Their interest is in Power. They have made Clear that they will not let human considerations get in the Way of i heir hold on Power. Ten years ago when Deng imprisoned the leading dissident Wei Jingsheng he said the world would not care a and he was right. He must have Felt confirmed in that View when Bush sent senior officials to Beijing Las James Kilpatrick Foiw i s. A dog year to offer Champagne toasts. Oksenberg and Barnett spoke As Bush did of the need to maintain a . Dialogue with China. Fine. But that docs not require paying special deference to the present chinese leadership As Bush did when he sent his High level Mission to Beijing. Winston lord a former . Ambassador to China wrote accurately and devastatingly about the Cost of that Mission. It pleased the elderly hard liners now in Power he said but robbed More moderate party figures Quot of the argument that chinese repression and xenophobia entail lords comments were the More important and courageous. Because they came from someone who has Many ties to China and has been on Good terms with the government. Most China scholars in this country take the same critical View. Perhaps by now Bush is having second thoughts. In principle and in practice the United states would do better these Days As lord put it. To encourage a Freedom in societies moving toward Post communism Quot a in China As in Eastern Europe. The new York times news services new right claimed by patrons of the arts we have been hearing a great Deal lately about not just civil rights but also animal rights student rights voting rights the right of privacy the right to life and so on. On March 5, a Brand new right popped into the news. This is a right to be Olvce naive at Public expense. It evolved in this fashion. John Frohn Thayer chairman of the National endowment for the arts was in los Angeles for a Public hearing on reauthorization of Nea funding. Among the spectators was rep. Pat Williams a Mont. Everything was going smoothly Only Friendly witnesses were on hand when Williams asked a Lough question. He asked if the Nea should permit Grants for the creation of a offensive Quot works of Art. Frohnmayer tried to Duck. Williams persisted. Finally Frohnmayer responded �?o1 would say he would not approve a Grant for anything whose sole purpose is to be offensive but he willingly would give the taxpayers Money to an artist who created Quot rough it is marvelous is it not it is marvellously Wacky. As the hearing continued it developed that violation of the right to be offensive at Public expense rope is Williams praised the chairman for his attitude. Well if an indulgent Congress gives the ers with Public Money. In new York in mid january woman named Annie Sprinkle who describes her self As a Quot feminine porn put on j 12 performances at a Manhattan theater called the Kitchen. The performances were funded in part through a giant Root the states Council on the arts Klueh in j turn is funded in part by a $500,001 Grant j from the the new York City Tribune covered the performance. I try to be delicate. Imi in Isnit easy. The City Tribune reported that the artist began by masturbating a Elorette audience with various Quot sex she concluded by opening her vaginal canal Waita speculum and inviting the audience to j Lake a close look at her cervix. The performance might have been in a Struc Tive for medical students a Kinmg o go into gynaecology but was it Quot Art Host hokum Balderdash nonsense i run no of breath. That such a performance Stum a a be publicly funded is preposterous it 1 j equally absurd to contend As j contends that to deny a Grant Lor sol j pornography is �?ocensorship.�?�. Look. In common with even Othiem writer i live by the first amen clinic Freedom of the press and speech arc i j Cious to me. At the top of my lungs 1 v 1 defend the right of any poet to write a Ever he pleases. Censorship a Ketuu. I Mal censorship a is abhorrent. Butt i Al Grants to individuals Are eau Ujj abhorrent. This alleged Rol e ought t exposed As the lie that it is. Universal press Syndicate Neall if an indulgent Congress i enough of this Robe Pera taps the Agency will yet hang itself. A Good thing too. There is something fundamentally wrong in the whole business of Nea Grants to individual artists composers. Poets and jazz musicians. These Grants ought to be banned. This is How the system works. Every year the Nea announces that it will give 50 fellowships of $20,000 each in say the Field of poetry. A panel of professional poets then windows the entries and names the Happy winners. But hold. In any such Competition i have judged a few the difference Between no. 50 and no. 51 is minute. Judgments Are entirely subjective. In is All a matter of the panels taste. But the upshot is that no. 50 gets $20,000 of the taxpayers Money plus the Fame and recognition that goes with being an Nea fellow. And no. 51 gets a nothing. Well you say that is How the world is. Some win some lose. This is True enough in the private sector but it ought not to be True in the Public sector. Our government has no business creating winners and los
