China sulks over the guest list again

Why didn't the head of the world's biggest nation attend the world's biggest funeral?

One of the impressive things about the funeral of Pope John Paul II was the attendance of foreign leaders from over 100 countries. Kings, queens, presidents and prime ministers from European countries rubbed shoulders with leaders from Muslim countries including President Khatami of Iran, President Hamid Karzai of Afghanistan, Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan, of Turkey, and King Abdullah of Jordan. From the Asia-Pacific part of the world, Indonesia sent two cabinet ministers, Japan sent a former foreign minister, South Korea sent Prime Minister Lee Hae-chan. The Indian delegation was led by Vice-President Bhairon Singh Shekhawat.

But the world’s largest nation, the People’s Republic of China, sent nobody. It was furious that the President of Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian, was attending.

That non-attendance constituted another diplomatic gaffe on China’s part, closely following on the difficulties it created by the anti-secession law aimed at Taiwan. A senior representative from China, perhaps Hu Jintao himself, could have been in Rome to exchange courtesies with European leaders. At the present time, Beijing wants the EU to lift its embargo on arms sales to China. Instead, China drew unwelcome attention to itself by its angry absence.

Meanwhile, attending the papal funeral was a political coup for Taiwan’s President Chen Shui-bian. The Vatican has diplomatic relations with Taiwan, and the funeral provided Chen with the opportunity to set foot on European soil for the first time.

At the time of the funeral, Chinese Foreign Ministry official Qin Gang said that the Chinese government was ready to improve relations with the Vatican on the basis of two principles. “They are: First, the Vatican must sever the so-called ‘diplomatic relations’ with Taiwan, recognise that the Government of the People’s Republic of China is the sole legal government representing the whole China, and Taiwan is an inalienable part of China. Second, the Vatican must not interfere with the internal affairs of China in the name of religion.”

The first principle, diplomatic relations with Taiwan, may not be an insuperable obstacle for the Vatican. Since 1980, the Vatican’s embassy in Taipei has been headed by a charge d’affaires, rather than a cleric of ambassadorial rank.

Speaking to Reuters at the time of the funeral, Hong Kong’s Bishop Joseph Zen said: “If the Chinese government is willing to grant real freedom to the church in mainland China, then the Vatican would reluctantly be willing to give up its diplomatic relations with Taiwan.” Bishop Zen, originally from Shanghai, is a stern critic of the Beijing government on the religious freedom issue.

Who will appoint bishops?
However the attitude of the Chinese government towards the church, including the right of the Vatican to appoint bishops, may be the crux of the matter, rather than the question of Taiwan.

China severed relations with the Vatican in 1951 after expelling foreign clergy. Catholics are permitted to attend state-sanctioned churches which are under the Chinese Catholic Patriotic Association, and whose bishops are appointed by Beijing, although many of these privately acknowledge the authority of the Pope. The members of this “official” church number 5.3 million according to Beijing, but there are probably another 7 to 10 million Catholics in the “underground” church, which recognises the Pope’s authority. Further complications arise because it is difficult to distinguish between the two groups, and adherents move from one to the other, to some extent depending on the attitude of local authorities.

Consistent with its desire to control all important areas of society, Beijing insists that the appointment of Catholic bishops in China is an “internal affair”, and the Vatican should not interfere. Naturally, the Vatican sees this as a religious matter which does not normally involve the secular authorities.

There have been other points of difference between Beijing and the Vatican. Between the years 1648 and 1930, 120 Catholics were martyred in China, including Chinese and foreign missionaries. They were canonized by the Vatican on October 1, 2000. Beijing took strong exception to this, although none of those canonized had actually died at the hands of the communists.

Nevertheless, Beijing defended the killings and claimed that most of them “were executed for violation of Chinese laws during the invasion of China by imperialists and colonialists.”

Meanwhile, Catholics loyal to the Vatican continue to be persecuted in China. According to a recent Vatican report, the bishop of Wenzhou, Monsignor James Lin Xili, who is 86 years old, was detained by Chinese security forces in March.

While it is unlikely that the Vatican would surrender its authority over the question of appointing bishops, Hong Kong journalist Frank Ching points to a possible precedent. Writing in China Brief, he notes that the one country that might offer a model for agreement between the Vatican and Beijing is Vietnam.

“While the Vatican has no diplomatic relations with Vietnam, it has been attempting to work out an arrangement for bishops to in effect be endorsed by both the Church and the Vietnamese Government...

“Still, this has not worked to the full satisfaction of either party: both want to have the final say on the choice, and so neither is willing to establish formal diplomatic relations. The most contentious issue remains the Vietnamese government’s demand to have the right to approve appointments. With the Church unwilling to yield to such a proviso, quite a few dioceses in Vietnam are still awaiting the appointment of new bishops.”

Mostly outside the glare of publicity, meetings between Vatican officials and Chinese representatives have been taking place for the last 20 years. Just before the Pope’s death, Cardinal Godfried Danneels of Belgium met with Chinese Vice Premier Hui Liangyu in Beijing. These sorts of meetings can be expected to continue. But there is something else which can’t be overlooked.

Defending human rights
The much travelled John Paul II wanted to visit China during his pontificate, but was prevented by Beijing from even visiting Hong Kong, during an Asian tour in 1999.

The question of diplomatic recognition, and Beijing’s desire to control the appointment of bishops are the two main problems on the surface. But the refusal to let the Pope even visit Hong Kong leads us to the third problem, not much discussed, but perhaps of even greater importance.

The ideas which the Church promotes, particularly the dignity of each human person, the human rights which flow from that, and Christian ideas about the way society should reflect those rights, are serious problems for totalitarian regimes. The leadership in Beijing are well aware of what took place in Central and Eastern Europe when a charismatic Pope proclaimed those ideas. In conjunction with other developments, that led to the overthrow of communist regimes in Europe.

The legitimacy of China’s regime relies on maintaining rapid economic growth, appealing to ideas of hyper-nationalism, and stifling dissent through censorship and crackdowns by security forces. It is a fragile legitimacy, and the leadership group knows it. Catholics are a small minority in China, but ideas can be infectious. Best to keep them under control.

Joseph Lim is a freelance journalist in Melbourne who has followed human rights in China for many years.