Iconic investigative reporter Dai Qing offers fresh insights into the Party’s internal struggles in an exclusive interview with Voice of America.

By Chen Xiaoping | Voice of America (VOA) | English translation by Probe International

September 7, 2024

Last month, the Beijing government held a grand commemoration for the 120th anniversary of Deng Xiaoping’s birth, reigniting discussions about Deng’s political and economic legacy.

Chinese investigative journalist Dai Qing’s new book Deng Xiaoping in 1989 was published in June by Bouden House in New York. After years of absence from the media, 83-year-old Dai Qing granted an exclusive interview to Voice of America, in which she hopes to offer fresh details about Deng Xiaoping’s decisions during the Tiananmen Square Incident, particularly through the lens of Zhao Ziyang’s political career. She examines the power struggle between Deng Xiaoping and Chen Yun, aiming to reinterpret the nature of the Tiananmen Square Incident and explore why China, in 1989, reversed its course away from a hopeful path toward modernization.

The Power Struggle Between Deng Xiaoping and Chen Yun Shaped China’s Political Direction in 1989

Many books have already been published on the Tiananmen Square Incident, such as Zhang Liang’s The Tiananmen Papers, Zhao Ziyang’s Prisoner of the State, The Tiananmen Diary by Li Peng, and The 1989 Democracy Movement by Chen Xiaoya, a former associate researcher at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences. Dai Qing said her new edition of Deng Xiaoping in 1989 focuses on the “internal power struggles” that occurred during the Tiananmen period.

In her explanation to Voice of America’s video program, ‘In-Depth Perspective,’ Dai Qing noted that, unlike official or public narratives, the root cause of the Tiananmen Incident was the internal struggles within the Communist Party. What began as a political debate—Chen Yun advocating for a planned economy, Deng Xiaoping for an open market—eventually escalated into a power struggle over who would call the shots. This power struggle culminated in a vicious battle for survival. Dai Qing describes this as a repetition of the power dynamics that had existed within the Communist Party since Mao Zedong. According to her, the “top-level conflict” ultimately derailed China’s modernization process.

Dai Qing believes that Zhao Ziyang’s downfall exemplifies the internal conflict during the Tiananmen period. Deng Xiaoping initially trusted Zhao and even considered a full transfer of power to him. However, Chen Yun had a different view of Zhao. At the 13th Central Committee’s Fourth Plenary Session, when Li Peng delivered the report on Zhao Ziyang’s errors during the “anti-party, anti-socialist turmoil,” Chen Yun expressed his longstanding dislike of Zhao, indicating that he wanted to replace him as soon as possible. Ultimately, Zhao was ousted under pressure from Chen Yun’s faction, and due to his refusal to recant on the Tiananmen issue, Zhao was removed from the Central Committee entirely. “Ziyang was too good. Deng couldn’t bear to let him go.”

When asked whether Deng Xiaoping regretted sidelining Zhao Ziyang after expelling him from the Central Committee but retaining his Party membership, Dai Qing responded that Deng did have second thoughts. Deng sent his trusted aide Ding Guangen to Zhao’s house, hoping to convince Zhao to soften his stance on the Tiananmen issue. However, Zhao maintained that he had acted according to Deng’s directives and did nothing wrong. Dai Qing added that after Deng’s southern tour in 1992, his family members reached out to Zhao’s family, encouraging him to reconsider his position on Tiananmen, suggesting that there was still a possibility for Zhao’s return. “Ziyang was too good. Deng couldn’t bear to let him go,” said Dai Qing.

Yan Mingfu Reveals the Top-Level Conflict, Zhao Ziyang’s Dangerous Position

To support her analysis of the Tiananmen Square Incident as a product of top-level power struggles, Dai Qing disclosed a personal experience from 35 years ago. On May 14, 1989, she and a group of intellectuals and protest leaders were invited to the United Front Work Department to negotiate with Yan Mingfu, who was then Secretary of the Secretariat and Minister of the United Front Work Department. Dai suggested that the government engage in dialogue with the students. Yan replied that he could only guarantee that Zhao Ziyang or Li Peng would go to the square to meet with the students, but they could only say, “Hello, students,” and could not acknowledge the students as “patriotic.”

Dai Qing walked out in response, but as she was leaving, Yan Mingfu said, “Tell them: go ahead and stir up trouble. If they continue, Zhao Ziyang is finished.” Dai Qing told ‘In-Depth Perspective’ that Yan Mingfu already knew by then that the situation had deteriorated and that a force within the party was determined to bring Zhao down. By May 14, the power struggle had reached this critical point.

Dai Qing was arrested on July 14, 1989, for her involvement in the so-called “turmoil” and was detained in Qincheng Prison. During her interrogation, the police repeatedly questioned her about her meeting with Yan Mingfu, but Dai Qing kept silent about Yan’s comments regarding Zhao’s fate.

Two Personal Experiences Show China Once Had Hope

During the interview, Dai Qing said that China in 1989 had a real chance of moving toward modernization, citing two personal experiences to illustrate signs of China’s openness at the time.

In one instance, on April 15, 1989, Dai accompanied Yin Yunpeng, the editor-in-chief of CommonWealth Magazine in Taiwan, to visit Wang Feng, head of the Taiwan Affairs Office. During the meeting, Wang revealed, “Comrade Xiaoping is considering removing the Four Persistence Principles from the constitution and placing them in the Party charter instead.” Dai also mentioned that Li Rui, the former deputy head of the Organization Department, told her that Hu Qiaomu had conveyed to Deng Xiaoping that the Four Persistence Principles were under reconsideration. Dai believed that shifting these principles to the Party charter, making them binding only on Party members, would have been a significant step toward political reform and an indication of openness.

Dai also recalled an encounter on May 13, 1989, with Hu Qili, a Politburo Standing Committee member responsible for ideology. When Dai asked Hu why foreign media could report on Beijing’s protests while domestic newspapers could not, Hu responded, “They can report.” He added, “I’ve said before that editorial decisions are made by the newspaper’s editor-in-chief.” Dai was shocked by this statement, interpreting it as a sign of potential press freedom. She explained that, at the time, all editorial decisions were made by the Propaganda Department, so allowing newspapers to make their own decisions would have been a major breakthrough.

Deng Xiaoping’s Secret List of Liberal Intellectuals for Execution

In the interview, Dai Qing also recounted her experience of being placed on a secret list of six liberal intellectuals who were to be executed, only to be later released. She explained that in late 1989, the authorities had adopted a policy to exile some, imprison others, and execute a few key figures involved in the unrest, and her name was on the list for execution. This information came from a prison guard who overheard it from prosecutors dining in the prison cafeteria. Dai believes that her inclusion on this list was influenced by the international situation at the time, particularly the execution of Nicolae and Elena Ceaușescu in Romania, which had a significant impact on Deng Xiaoping.*

However, the executions never took place, and Dai was released in June 1990, which she attributes to international pressure, including conditions set by the World Bank to restore loans to China. Along with Dai, 200 other political prisoners were freed.

The Mystery of the Tank Man and a Witness’s Testimony

The identity of the Tiananmen “Tank Man” remains a mystery. Dai Qing provided new information, recounting that while writing her book, she met a researcher from the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences who witnessed the event on the morning of June 5.

The witness said that at the time, many people were shouting at the “Tank Man,” telling him to “come back,” but he ignored them and climbed onto the tank. After he got down, local citizens grabbed him, showing concern for his safety. The tank stopped, and three soldiers emerged, armed with loaded guns. They fired several rounds into the bushes by the roadside, causing the “Tank Man” and the surrounding crowd to flee. According to the witness, the “Tank Man” did not speak a single word. He speculated that the man was likely a young person from outside Beijing, approximately 20 to 30 years old, and didn’t appear to be a student. This contrasts with the view of Tiananmen scholar Wu Renhua, who has suggested that the man may have been a student from another province, based on the bag he was carrying.

Dai Qing later asked police if the “Tank Man” had been part of a staged event orchestrated by authorities. The police told her that due to the chaotic circumstances at the time, it would have been impossible for the government to plan such an event involving the “Tank Man.”

Providing a Complete Picture of Deng Xiaoping’s Political Character

In the revised edition of Deng Xiaoping in 1989, Dai Qing has added a new chapter titled “Iron Fist in a Velvet Glove—The Political Character of Deng Xiaoping,” in which she aims to explain Deng Xiaoping’s series of decisions during the Tiananmen period through previously undisclosed personal experiences and research. She noted that while Taiwanese scholar Zhong Yanlin’s Deng Xiaoping Before the Cultural Revolution: Mao Zedong’s “Deputy Commander (1956-1966) and Harvard professor Ezra Vogel’s Deng Xiaoping and the Transformation of China focused on Deng’s reform era, her book serves as a “missing piece” regarding Deng’s actions during the Tiananmen Incident. “Together, these three books provide a complete picture of Deng Xiaoping,” she said.

Read the original, Chinese-language version of this article at the publisher’s website here.

For the English-language translation of Part Two in this conversation, see here.

* The Romanian revolution began with anti-government protests in the city of Timisoara and soon spread throughout the country, culminating in the trial and execution of longtime Romanian Communist Party General Secretary Nicolae Ceausescu and his wife, Elena, on Christmas Day in 1989. Unsettled by the political threat the Timisoara demonstrations represented, Ceausescu ordered military forces to open fire on protesters on Dec. 17, resulting in a death toll of 93. The violent crackdown unleashed widespread rioting and civil unrest, leaving Ceausescu exposed. His Marxist-Leninist government was the last of its kind in the Warsaw Pact to be removed, and the only one that collapsed in a violent overthrow and the execution of its leader.