U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

78–598 PDF 2013

TWO YEARS LATER: THE ONGOING DETENTIONS 

OF NOBEL PEACE PRIZE LAUREATE LIU 

XIAOBO AND HIS WIFE LIU XIA 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE 

COMMISSION ON CHINA 

ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

DECEMBER 12, 2012 

Printed for the use of the Congressional-Executive Commission on China 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.cecc.gov 
CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA 

LEGISLATIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS 

House Senate 

CHRISTOPHER H. SMITH, New Jersey, 

Chairman 

FRANK WOLF, Virginia 

DONALD A. MANZULLO, Illinois 

EDWARD R. ROYCE, California 

TIM WALZ, Minnesota 

MARCY KAPTUR, Ohio 

MICHAEL HONDA, California 

SHERROD BROWN, Ohio, Cochairman 

MAX BAUCUS, Montana 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DIANNE FEINSTEIN, California 

JEFF MERKLEY, Oregon 

SUSAN COLLINS, Maine 

JAMES RISCH, Idaho 

EXECUTIVE BRANCH COMMISSIONERS 

SETH D. HARRIS, Department of Labor 

MARIA OTERO, Department of State 

FRANCISCO J. SA ́ NCHEZ, Department of Commerce 

KURT M. CAMPBELL, Department of State 

NISHA DESAI BISWAL, U.S. Agency for International Development 

PAUL B. PROTIC, Staff Director 

LAWRENCE T. LIU, Deputy Staff Director 

(II) 
(III) 

CO N T E N T S 

Page 

Opening statement of Hon. Christopher Smith, a U.S. Representative from 

New Jersey; Chairman, Congressional-Executive Commission on China ....... 1 

Brown, Hon. Sherrod, a U.S. Senator from Ohio; Cochairman, CongressionalExecutive Commission on China ........................................................................ 4 

Gershman, Carl, President, National Endowment for Democracy ...................... 6 

Yang, Jianli, President, Initiatives for China/Citizen Power for China .............. 8 

Griffith, Patrick, Program Attorney, Freedom Now ............................................. 10 

Yu, Jie, independent author and associate of Liu Xiaobo .................................... 12 

Liu, Min, wife of Yue Jie; friend of Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia ................................ 13 

APPENDIX 

PREPARED STATEMENTS

Gershman, Carl ........................................................................................................ 26 

Yang, Jianli .............................................................................................................. 27 

Griffith, Patrick ....................................................................................................... 29 

Yu, Jie ....................................................................................................................... 31 

Liu, Min .................................................................................................................... 34

Smith, Hon. Christopher ......................................................................................... 35 

Brown, Hon. Sherrod ............................................................................................... 37 

(1) 

TWO YEARS LATER: THE ONGOING DETENTIONS OF NOBEL PEACE PRIZE LAUREATE 

LIU XIAOBO AND HIS WIFE LIU XIA 

WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 12, 2012 

CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE

COMMISSION ON CHINA, 

Washington, DC. 

The hearing was convened, pursuant to notice, at 10:12 a.m., in 

room 2118, Rayburn House Office Building, Representative Christopher Smith, Chairman, presiding. 

Also present: Senator Sherrod Brown, Cochairman. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER SMITH, A U.S. 

REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW JERSEY; CHAIRMAN, CONGRESSIONAL–EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA 

Chairman SMITH. The Commission will come to order. Welcome 

to everyone. 

Two years after the independent Nobel Committee awarded the 

Nobel Peace Prize to Chinese intellectual and democracy activist 

Liu Xiaobo, little has changed. Liu Xiaobo remains isolated in prison. He remains thousands of miles away from his wife, Liu Xia, 

who authorities have now held under house arrest for some 26 

months. 

Chinese authorities continue to defend their imprisonment of Liu 

Xiaobo and to deny his wife is under de facto house arrest. Despite 

global calls for the release of the Nobel Peace Prize laureate and 

his wife, Chinese authorities remain resolute in their will to silence 

them. 

It has now been a year since we last convened a hearing to discuss this outrageous and senseless violation of Liu Xiaobo and his 

wife’s rights. A year later we ask the same questions and express 

the same concerns. 

Liu Xiaobo’s ordeal is well known. In December 2010, the Nobel 

Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo for ‘‘his 

long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in 

China.’’ A year earlier, Chinese authorities sentenced him to 11 

years in prison for ‘‘inciting subversion of state power,’’ the longest 

known sentence for that so-called crime, simply because he exercised his internationally recognized right to free expression. 

Liu’s condition, according to court documents, was based on 

Charter 08 and six essays that he wrote. Mr. Liu’s trial, conviction, 

and sentence once again demonstrated the Chinese Government’s 

failure to uphold its international human rights obligations and its 
2 

failure to abide by procedural norms and safeguards that meet 

international standards. 

Liu Xiaobo co-wrote and signed Charter 08 and treaties urging 

political and legal reforms based on constitutional principles. Charter 08 states that freedom, equality, and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional 

government are the fundamental framework for protecting these 

values. 

In response to this public call for rights and reform, officials 

blocked access to, and censored all mention of, Charter 08. They 

questioned, summoned, or otherwise harassed hundreds of Chinese 

citizens for contributing to or signing the document. 

To many of us it was reminiscent of Charter 77, that great document written by many people in the former Czech Republic, 

Czechoslovakia at the time. That document, like so many others 

around the world, including Charter 08, articulates what we all believe is enshrined in the universal declaration of human rights. 

Every person, man, woman, or child, is deserving of those fundamental human rights. 

Today we have little news about Liu Xiaobo’s current condition. 

Liu remains in prison. There is little doubt that the Chinese continue to treat him unmercifully. Sadly, we do have some news. 

While we knew authorities continued to hold Liu’s wife under a de 

facto form of house arrest with little contact from the outside 

world, we have recently learned more about her unbearable circumstances and detention. 

Last week, two Associated Press journalists were able to briefly 

interview Liu Xia while the guards that kept watch over her were 

away for a midday break. Upon opening the door, the journalists 

found a woman shocked by the rare opportunity to communicate 

with those outside her prison. She wept and decried the injustice 

and absurdity of her detention. 

She told them of her poor health and of the outrageous abuses 

that she has suffered. Her ongoing plight has been referred to by 

some as the most severe retaliation by a government given to a 

Nobel winner’s family. In violation of Chinese law, Liu Xia remains 

detained, a victim of the government’s contempt, its paranoia, and 

its weakness. Angered by Liu’s award and his global support, Chinese authorities have unjustly detained this innocent woman as 

well. 

The targeting of wives and children, grandparents and associates, however, remains a common practice for the Chinese Government. A few weeks ago, a nephew of Chen Guangcheng, the blind 

activist who escaped to the United States earlier this year, was 

sentenced to 39 months in prison after defending himself from 

thugs who had attacked his family. As with Liu Xiaobo’s case, the 

trial was marred by procedural irregularities and gross violations. 

In recent months, the wife and child of a Mongolian activist, 

Hada, have been illegally confined to their home and blocked from 

communicating with others. Today we will hear moving first-hand 

accounts of how families suffer when courageous individuals speak 

out against the Chinese Government, especially its human rights 

abuses. 
3 

This, of course, is not a new tactic by the Chinese authorities. In 

recent years we have heard how Chinese officials, and those operating under their authority, have interrogated children or harassed 

acquaintances. Chinese guards have shouted expletives at schoolaged children, sons and daughters, and enforced economic reprisals 

against relatives and loved ones. 

Liu Xia is not alone, but she remains a symbol of these often 

overlooked collateral victims. Why target family members and 

friends? The Chinese Government fears the free thinkers they love 

and support. It acts in ways to silence those free thinkers who promote the best ideals and seek the greatest good for China. 

In China, free thinkers represent a threat to the government’s 

so-called stability, while representing new hopes for the Chinese 

people. This threat of reform is China’s greatest concern. Recently 

after the sentencing of Chinese official Bo Xilai’s wife for intentional homicide, leading human rights and China experts suggested 

that she might receive a medical pardon after nine years. Nine 

years for murder, as compared to 11 for Liu Xiaobo’s call for freedom? 

This is the China we are dealing with, one in which premeditated murder is viewed with less concern than calls for non-violent 

political reform, a China in which Chinese officials are sentenced 

to reclusive, plush prisons while wives and children and parents of 

rights advocates are doomed to a Kafkaesque existence, languishing in domestic prisons without opportunities for appeals or 

pardons. 

A year after our last hearing on the subject, little has changed. 

Mr. Liu Xiaobo remains in prison and his wife under an extralegal 

form of house arrest. Our resolve, however, has not changed. In 

fact, it has grown even stronger. Today we are more concerned 

about the current conditions for Liu Xiaobo and his wife. We are 

more outraged at the lack of humanity demonstrated by those perpetrating these crimes, for the thugs guarding Liu Xia’s door, and 

the newly appointed leadership in Beijing. 

Today, our resolve and the resolve of free-minded people is, without question, stronger. A few years ago, we called on China to immediately and unconditionally release Liu Xiaobo and his wife. 

Today we similarly demand China end this absurdity for these 

noble citizens and for all who remain detained in China for their 

political or religious beliefs. 

We have not forgotten Liu Xiaobo and his wife. We commit to 

seeking their release from confinement and detention. We will not 

forget them next year, or any year thereafter, regardless of the circumstances. We will continue to demand their freedom and continue to demand that all Chinese citizens enjoy the fundamental 

freedoms under international law. 

It is with this resolve and concern that we are joined today by 

a panel of extraordinary experts on these cases and on China more 

broadly, and I would like to thank them for their advocacy, for 

their tireless efforts on behalf of freedom, democracy, and human 

rights in China, especially for their deep concern and abiding love 

for Liu Xiaobo and his wife, and for being here today to share those 

thoughts with us. 
4 

I would like to now yield to the Cochair of the Commission, my 

good friend and colleague, Senator Brown. 

[The prepared statement of Chairman Smith appears in the appendix.] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. SHERROD BROWN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO; COCHAIRMAN, CONGRESSIONAL–EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA 

Senator BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for hosting this hearing. The Chairman and I stand united behind this cause and I am 

grateful for his efforts. 

We stand with our government, we stand with governments 

around the world, and the 134 Nobel laureates, led by Archbishop 

Tutu, to urge incoming Chinese President Xi Jinping to immediately and unconditionally release Liu Xiaobo and his wife Liu 

Xia. 

Let me be clear, there is no question that China has made 

progress on many fronts, but we know that the Chinese people are 

not, and should not, be satisfied with economic progress in the absence of justice. We know that Chinese citizens, like women and 

men around the world, want and deserve basic human rights. They 

deserve freedom, justice, and equality of opportunity. They deserve 

to voice their opinions without fear of oppression. 

That is why we are here today. For decades, Liu Xiaobo has been 

one of the most passionate and thoughtful advocates for freedom 

and justice and human rights in China. He was a leader who returned to his country from New York during the 1989 Tiananmen 

democracy protest. He has written nearly 800 essays advocating 

human rights and peaceful reform. He was one of the co-authors 

of Charter 08, a document released four years ago calling for an 

end to authoritarian rule and respect for human rights. 

For this, Liu has been censored. He has endured three years in 

a labor camp and now he is serving the 4th year of an 11-year prison sentence. That is why, when the Nobel Committee awarded Liu 

the Peace Prize in 2010, they noted his long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in China. 

They understood, the world understood, just as many in China 

understand, that freedom and human rights are not freely given. 

It takes courage and commitment. It takes people like Liu who are 

willing to sacrifice for their neighbors, their families, their fellow 

citizens, and the next generation. 

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., a Nobel laureate himself of course, 

popularized this struggle as the fierce commitment to building the 

‘‘beloved community.’’ Liu follows in the tradition of Peace Prize 

winners like Dr. King who labored to build a better world brick by 

brick. 

In 1991, as we know, the Nobel Committee awarded the prize to 

Aung San Suu Kyi for her democratic opposition to a brutal regime. 

All of these activists have fought oppression with a message of nonviolence at terrific personal sacrifice and an unwillingness to give 

up. 

Liu spoke about the efficacy of non-violence in 2006 when he 

wrote ‘‘the greatest of non-violence resistance is even as man is 

faced with forceful tyranny . . . the victim responds to hate with 
5 

love . . . and to violence with reason.’’ Each day China denies citizens like Liu basic freedoms, China loses out on the diversity of 

opinions that lead to better government policies, a better country, 

and a more just society. 

Imprisoning Liu is not the act of a nation serious about earning 

a place of respect at the global table. It is an act of an authoritarian state afraid, afraid of the strength of its own people. When 

Aung San Suu Kyi was finally able to give her Nobel acceptance 

speech 20 years later in June of this year, more than two decades 

after being awarded the prize, in her speech she said everyone is 

capable of contributing to peace. 

Liu exemplifies the courage needed to cultivate justice. We urge 

China to release the Liu family. They should not have to wait two 

decades. He should not have to wait two decades to give his own 

acceptance speech. We look forward to that day. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Brown appears in the appendix.] 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Chairman Brown. 

I would like to now introduce our very distinguished panel of witnesses, beginning first with Carl Gershman, President of the National Endowment for Democracy. Mr. Gershman joined us last 

year for our hearing on Liu Xiaobo and we are happy to welcome 

him back. Mr. Gershman has presided with extraordinary effectiveness and balance over the Endowment’s grants program in Africa, 

Asia, the Middle East, Eastern Europe, the former Soviet Union, 

and Latin America, and it is great to see him again. I know that 

the work he does has had a profound effect worldwide. 

We will then hear from Dr. Yang Jianli, who is the President of 

Initiatives for China. Dr. Yang is a distinguished scholar and democracy activist, internationally recognized for his efforts to promote democracy and human rights in China. 

Forced to flee China after 1989, Dr. Yang returned in 2001 and 

was imprisoned by Chinese authorities. Following his release in 

2007, Dr. Yang founded Initiatives for China, also known as Citizen Power for China, a nongovernmental organization that promotes China’s peaceful transition to democracy. 

I would note parenthetically that it was my honor to join him in 

Oslo when Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. He was 

one of the leaders of the Chinese activists who was there and 

played a very prominent role in Liu Xiaobo receiving that award 

in the first place. I just want to thank him for his leadership on 

all of these issues, but especially for that. It was an honor to be 

with him. 

Our next witness is Mr. Patrick Griffith, a program attorney at 

Freedom Now, a Washington, DC-based legal advocacy organization that works to free prisoners of conscience around the world, 

including Chinese citizens Liu Xiaobo and Gao Zhisheng. 

A graduate of Georgetown University Law Center, Mr. Griffith 

currently serves as co-international pro bono legal counsel to Liu 

Xiaobo and his wife, Liu Xia. So, thank you as well for that great 

advocacy. 

We will then hear from Mr. Yu Jie, a best-selling author in 

China and a close associate and biographer of Liu Xiaobo. Yu is one 

of the co-authors and co-signers of Charter 08. In January 2012, Yu 
6 

and his family fled China after being released from extralegal 

home confinement. Yu and his family later received political asylum in the United States. 

Finally, we will hear from Liu Min, Yu Li’s wife and a close associate of Liu Xia. Because of her husband’s activism and outspokenness, Ms. Liu was likewise subjected to unfortunate reprisals and 

de facto house arrest. We thank her for her participation here 

today, as well as the ordeal that she has personally endured. I look 

forward to her discussion on how Liu Xiaobo and other family 

members, especially his wife, have suffered under official abuses. 

Mr. Gershman, please proceed. 

STATEMENT OF CARL GERSHMAN, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL 

ENDOWMENT FOR DEMOCRACY 

Mr. GERSHMAN. Thank you so much, Mr. Chairman, Senator 

Brown. Thank you so much for inviting me to testify today. 

I would like to take this opportunity to address, briefly, three 

issues: the dangerous instability of China’s political system and its 

immense human costs; the importance of a peaceful democratic 

transition as the best way to ensure progress and stability in 

China, and finally, the recognition that Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia and 

Charter 08 are part of a broad popular movement within China 

which represents the best hope for a democratic future. 

The recent scandals around Chongqing Party secretary Bo Xilai 

and his failed bid for power in the Party leadership transition provide a valuable glimpse into the way the Chinese Government is 

operating. We see how brutal struggles, unconstrained by formalized rules and due process, are still the norm for the Party from 

the top to the bottom. This vulnerability of the Party echoes 

throughout the political system. I guess the Chinese state is brittle 

and unstable. Many inside China worry the country is headed for 

a social explosion. According to the well-known Chinese scholar Yu 

Jianrong, for example, ‘‘the government sees the expression of people’s legitimate interest as a threat to the social order. Land rights 

of peasants, food safety for children, wages for workers, residency 

rights for rural migrants in the urban areas, and minority rights 

for Tibetans and Uyghurs, all are undermined by government repression. 

The law, meanwhile, provides little refuge. While there have 

been modest gains in the legal system, whatever gains were made 

are now backsliding. The blind activist, Chen Guangcheng, who we 

were together with, Mr. Chairman, as you remember, at the end 

of October here in Washington, whose brave escape from the security apparatus earlier this year highlights the level of repression, 

calls the Chinese system lawless and this lawlessness is at the root 

of the instability. 

The number of collective protests has been rising steadily from 

9,700 in 1993 to 90,000 in 2006, to over 200,000 in 2011, an average of about 500 a day. In Tibet, the government controls are so 

tight that comparisons have been made to a war zone. 

To protest the lack of religious and political freedom, 95 Tibetans, 82 men and 13 women, have self-immolated since 2009. Constant repression of Uyghur culture and a lack of opportunity be-
7 

cause of open discrimination of Uyghurs has resulted in deep resentment and a hardening of ethnic tension. 

Across China, demolitions and land appropriations deprive many 

of their hard-earned property and livelihood. Increasing desperation and the inability of the current system to provide long-term 

guarantees of rights and liberties lead to more protests and the vicious cycle spirals downward. 

Even under these bleak conditions, a social movement has arisen 

in which ordinary people seek to use the law on behalf of China’s 

people. It takes corrupt officials, police, and the government to 

court for malfeasance and injustice. It organizes peaceful demonstrations to educate other citizens and rally support for their 

cause. It posts messages about rights violations on the Internet 

when the press turns them away. 

They call the secret police on behalf of human rights defenders 

and show up at police stations and black jails for advocacy and rescue. Chen Guangcheng’s moral resistance and ultimate escape were 

the focus of such a human rights campaign, one of the largest since 

the founding of the People’s Republic. 

The voices are growing. Tens of millions of Internet users gather 

and gawk online at stories of corruption and human rights violations to show support for their fellow citizens and create pressure 

for more accountability. Again, the human costs are high. These 

human rights defenders receive no help from the establishment, intellectuals, or lawyers from their localities. 

The courts either refuse to take their cases; they are defenseless 

against police violation; or they are often illegally detained, tortured, and sentenced to a labor camp without anyone hearing about 

it. Human rights lawyers and public intellectuals join them at considerable risk to themselves to address China’s lawlessness. 

The writings of Nobel laureate Liu Xiaobo and Charter 08 should 

be seen in this context. Liu has tirelessly pushed for political 

change by asking the state to live up to its own laws and obligations. The charter calls for gradual political reform, the rule of law, 

the separation of powers, and a multi-Party system. Its signatories, 

over 10,000, are a diverse body comprising both prominent figures 

within the system and ordinary people at the grassroots, and they 

are united behind a common vision of a democratic China. 

It is part and parcel of the broad bottom-up movement for popular constitutionalism and gradual change. To date, the Chinese 

Government has chosen a path different from the one envisioned 

by these civil society activists. To keep widespread dissatisfaction 

at bay, the government encourages nationalism and stokes popular 

anger in order to bolster its legitimacy. 

In September, the government encouraged a wave of anti-Japanese demonstrations, which turned violent in many places. It correctly gauges that nationalism serves as a powerful instrument in 

impeding public demand for democratic change. 

Simultaneously, the Party’s proactive repression has kept civil 

society fragmented, fragile, beset by doubt, and still largely unable 

to mount meaningful monitoring of the government’s performance 

and adherence to both domestic and international obligations. 

Such a strategy, however, may open China to great danger with 

grave implications for the entire world. The instability of the cur-
8 

rent system may eventually end in large-scale and bloody repression or, equally disastrously, in violent upheaval. China may decide 

to step up an aggressive stance abroad to consolidate support and 

distract criticism by fomenting nationalist antagonism. 

By so doing it can inadvertently provoke conflict. Given China’s 

geopolitical significance and the vital role it plays in the international economic order, all these outcomes would create disruptions that travel far beyond the region. Most importantly, the 

human costs for the Chinese people would be unthinkable. 

We have reason to believe then that civil society’s fight to open 

up the political system to the Chinese people represents the only 

desirable alternative to the current status quo. The movement can 

help bridge the vast ideological income and social divisions splintering China through political liberalization, the protection of basic 

rights, and the pursuit of social justice. 

Congress and the administration, as well as the American public, 

have a golden opportunity to act in a bipartisan manner in calling 

for Liu Xiaobo’s release, not only as a matter of justice and human 

rights, but also to enable him to take part in civil debate on the 

challenge of the democratic transformation of China. 

Let us hope that the new Chinese leadership will recognize this 

historic opportunity. In doing so, they would avert the profound crisis facing their country and open up the prospects for China, whose 

power and prosperity would be strengthened through democracy. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Gershman, for your 

testimony and your leadership. 

Dr. Yang? 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Gershman appears in the appendix.] 

STATEMENT OF YANG JIANLI, PRESIDENT, INITIATIVES FOR 

CHINA/CITIZEN POWER FOR CHINA 

Mr. YANG. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Senator Brown. Thank 

you for hosting this important hearing. Liu Xiaobo and his wife’s 

plight is well known. I will not repeat the facts about it today. 

Instead, I want to focus on Liu Xiaobo’s significance for democracy in China. Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel honor reflects the international 

recognition of the Chinese democracy movement as represented by 

him. He has become the symbol of democracy in China. And simply 

because of such symbolism, today, his continued imprisonment has 

become a footnote to the vow made by Hu Jintao in his political 

report at a recent Party’s 18th Congress. He stated that China’s 

leadership would never take ‘‘the evil road of changing flags and 

banners,’’ code for abandoning one-Party rule. This pledge dispelled 

any doubts about the Party’s resolve to keep its political monopoly. 

But we must remember that the Chinese Communist Party 

[CCP] does not have the only say about China’s future. Liu Xiaobo 

represents another force that also will help shape the future of 

China, pushing China to take an alternative road, the ‘‘evil road,’’ 

in Hu Jintao’s words. This force is becoming increasingly viable. 

The most important sign of this movement is the recent intellectual awakening, evidenced by the return of the democracy debate, 

which has occupied a central place in the public discourse around 
9 

China’s leadership change. More and more intellectuals, who were 

generally co-opted by the regime not long after the Tiananmen 

massacre and acted as its defenders for many years, have come to 

realize and acknowledge Liu Xiaobo’s contributions, ideas, and beliefs, which are embodied in Charter 08. Recognition by intellectuals that the status quo is unsustainable is always the first, and 

vital, step toward changing it. 

Two other most important factors helping move toward democratic change in an autocratic country are coming together in 

China, namely a robust plurality of disaffected citizens and a split 

in the leadership. 

Let me elaborate. 

Since the Tiananmen massacre, corruption has become one of the 

CCP’s important strategies to survive because no Party officials at 

any level would be loyal to the regime if they were not given the 

privilege to corrupt. Such a predatory regime has caused unprecedented infringement of the basic rights of the ordinary people, resulting in increasing frequent protests. 

To keep these self-motivated protests from becoming a conscious 

movement by demanding an overall change, the Chinese Government 

has built a monstrous stability-sustaining system. This gigantic 

system treats every citizen as a potential enemy, and it has successfully made them enemies—dissidents, independent intellectuals, 

land-lease peasants, victims of forced demolitions and eviction, victims of forced abortion, veterans, migrant workers, Tibetans, 

Uyghurs, Mongolians, Christians, and Falun Gong practitioners, 

you name it. 

Perhaps the only achievement in China’s political system in the 

past 30 years is the establishment of the ‘‘2-term, 10-year, 1-generation’’ term limit system. Many observers predicted that such a 

system would ensure long-term stability for the CCP regime, wishfully believing that this system helped the CCP find a way out of 

the pit of power discontinuity that has plagued all dictatorships in 

history. The Bolshevik-like event, however, mercifully burst that 

bubble. People within the Party have begun to challenge this power 

succession system. The cracks are only widening. 

As nongovernmental forces grow and civil protests escalate, the 

struggle for power among different factions within the regime will 

become more pronounced. Once external pressures reach critical 

mass, rival affections within the regime will have no choice but to 

take the voices of citizens seriously and seek their support to survive. 

That said, I want to emphasize that we need an overall, viable 

pro-democracy movement to force the dictatorship to crack open. A 

long-term resilient movement will reach critical mass when idealists like Liu Xiaobo join forces with the self-motivated public or the 

disaffected with the status quo. 

A milestone to meet that objective would be the formation of a 

group of civil leaders able to represent the general public and to 

at least partially disrupt the current political order—a group that 

would catch attention and support of the international community 

and carry out and call for effective negotiations with the government. 
10 

What happened in Guangdong, Wukan Village a year ago is a 

good example. Liu Xiaobo, as a widely accepted leader both at 

home and abroad, will surely play a unique role in forming such 

a group. Therefore, working toward his freedom is vital for democratic change in China. I am particularly encouraged by the strong 

support of Liu Xiaobo and Charter 08 from world leaders like Senator Brown and Congressman Smith and other world human rights 

leaders and activists. 

Aung San Suu Kyi was released from house arrest in November 

2010. For the first time, there is hope for reform in Burma. In 

seeking Liu Xiaobo’s release, we hope and struggle for the same in 

China. 

Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Dr. Yang, thank you very much for your testimony and for your insights. 

Mr. Griffith? 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Yang appears in the appendix.] 

STATEMENT OF PATRICK GRIFFITH, PROGRAM ATTORNEY, 

FREEDOM NOW 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Mr. Cochairman, and thank you for the opportunity to join you here today. As 

an activist, this Commission is an essential source for information 

about human rights violations in China, and I want to begin by 

thanking both the Commissioners and their staff for their unwavering support for prisoners of conscience. 

As an attorney with Freedom Now and international pro bono 

counsel to the Lius, my testimony today will focus primarily on 

why their detention is a flagrant violation of China’s obligations 

under international law. I am also going to briefly explain, in our 

view, what steps the United States can take to lead a growing 

international movement to free the Lius. 

The circumstances of Dr. Liu’s detention are widely known and 

largely undisputed, even by the Chinese Government itself. At the 

time of his arrest in 2008, as was noted, Dr. Liu was leading an 

initiative called Charter 08, which is a political manifesto that calls 

for peaceful democratic reform and respect for human rights. 

Dr. Liu was detained in an unknown location for six months 

without charge or any legal process whatsoever, and was ultimately accused of inciting subversion. The prosecution’s indictment, like the court’s judgment sentencing him to 11 years in prison, specifically relied on his participation in the production of 

Charter 08 as evidence of his guilt. 

Shortly after Dr. Liu was announced as the 2010 Nobel Peace 

Prize laureate, the government placed his wife, Liu Xia, under 

house arrest. Two years later, she remains cut off from the outside 

world without even the pretense of legal process. 

In a rare interview, she recently confirmed that she has been 

under house arrest, unable to communicate with the outside world 

except for brief weekly trips to buy groceries and visit family. Frequently confined to bed due to back pain, she described this continued detention as ‘‘painfully surreal.’’ 

The prosecution of Dr. Liu is a clear violation of international 

law which specifically protects the right to peaceful freedom of ex-
11 

pression. Such international protections apply regardless of whether Chinese domestic law punishes peaceful political expression of 

subversion, and the government’s constant refrain that Dr. Liu’s 

imprisonment is the result of a criminal prosecution is simply irrelevant. Further, as internationally protected rights, their violation 

is the proper concern of the international community and not merely an issue of domestic judicial sovereignty. 

Liu Xia’s case is even more appalling. Despite a mountain of evidence to the contrary, the Chinese Government has claimed repeatedly that no legal enforcement action has been taken against her. 

This claim is either a lie or an admission of guilt. Nothing under 

domestic or international law authorizes the indefinite detention of 

a person without any due process whatsoever for the mere crime 

of being married to a Nobel laureate. 

In response to petitions filed by Freedom Now on behalf of Dr. 

Liu and Liu Xia, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary 

Detention found their continued detention a violation of international law and called for their immediate release. Despite this 

finding by the United Nations, the situation for Dr. Liu and Liu 

Xia remains largely unchanged. 

However, recently an international movement to free the Lius 

has been gathering cohesion and momentum. Last week, the International Committee for Liu Xiaobo, a coalition of 6 Nobel Peace 

Prize laureates and 15 nongovernmental organizations, released a 

letter from 134 Nobel laureates calling for the immediate and unconditional release of the Lius. 

The letter was signed by laureates from across all six Nobel disciplines, not just Peace prize winners. A corresponding petition online has gathered over 300,000 signatures from at least 82 countries. 

In light of this growing movement, we believe that there are 

three ways that the United States can redouble its efforts and 

change tactics in support of the Lius. First, as a Nobel Peace Prize 

laureate himself, we believe President Obama has a unique opportunity to take a leading role in this growing citizens’ movement. 

Initiatives such as the laureate letter provide Mr. Obama with a 

ready-made platform to highlight the continued detention of the 

Lius. 

While the President did call for Dr. Liu’s release shortly after he 

was announced as the recipient of the 2010 Peace prize, he has not 

publicly reiterated that call nor personally called for Liu Xia’s release. Without the President’s continued public engagement, we 

fear that Beijing will receive the message that it can continue to 

detain Dr. Liu and Liu Xia without suffering any additional consequences. 

Second, the United States should consistently and publicly hold 

the Chinese Government accountable. Because the ultimate measure of success, from our perspective, is the Lius’ freedom, this anniversary presents an opportune moment for the United States to reassess its approach. 

Practices such as beginning bilateral meetings, regardless of 

topic, by raising political prisoners would send a clear message that 

the Chinese Government’s refusal to comply with international law 

is unacceptable. 
12 

Finally, the United States should take a leading role in multilateral efforts to support the Liu’s. For example, a letter from other 

G–8 countries highlighting the continued detention of the world’s 

only imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize laureate could remind the incoming Chinese leadership that if it wants to join the community 

of nations as a full partner, it must do more than merely talk about 

human rights and the rule of law. 

Admittedly, these are among the hardest cases in one of the most 

difficult countries, but the growing citizens’ movement gives us reason to hope. While relations between the United States and China 

are necessarily complex, respect for fundamental human rights 

must remain at the center of that relationship and the continued 

detention of the Liu’s is an important bellwether indicating that 

more must be done. 

Thank you for your time. I would welcome the opportunity to answer any questions. 

Chairman SMITH. Mr. Griffith, thank you very much. 

We would like to now hear from Yu Jie. Mr. Yu? Could you put 

on your microphone, please? 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Griffith appears in the appendix.] 

STATEMENT OF YU JIE, INDEPENDENT AUTHOR AND 

ASSOCIATE OF LIU XIAOBO 

Mr. YU. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very 

much to the Congressional-Executive Commission on China for giving me this opportunity to speak to you here. 

For the last 10 years, I have been close friends with Mr. Liu 

Xiaobo. In January of this year I came to the United States and 

finished a memoir for Mr. Liu Xiaobo which covers over 500 pages. 

This memoir has been published in Hong Kong in its Chinese 

version, and its English version will be published next year. 

As a close friend of Liu Xiaobo, I see his growth in four stages. 

The first stage is in the 1980s, when the intellectual atmosphere 

in China was relatively liberal. At that time Mr. Liu Xiaobo started 

from literary criticism and aesthetics to critics of Chinese traditional culture, Chinese intellectuals, and the political system. 

In the spring of 1989 while Liu was a visiting scholar in the 

United States, student protests began in Beijing. Liu was determined to return to China and dedicate himself to the students’ 

movement, and that was a life-changing experience for him. After 

that, he was imprisoned and persecuted and he has been thrown 

into prison for six years in the last decade. 

Even during this very difficult condition, Liu Xiaobo continued 

his cause. He drafted and organized the signatories to a number of 

open letters addressing issues such as implementing democracy, 

protecting human rights, and overturning the official verdict on the 

Tiananmen massacre. However, because of the lack of the Internet 

era at that time, this movement was still limited within a small intellectual circle in China. 

Throughout the 1990s we see the broad and wide use of the 

Internet in China and that allowed Liu Xiaobo’s voice to be heard 

by the Chinese public. At the same time, he was diligently writing 
13 

articles while going outside to participate in democratic movements. 

Two of the major activities that he participated in during that 

period were, one, Liu Xiaobo served two consecutive terms as the 

president of the Independent Chinese PEN Center. You know that 

the freedom of association is written in the Chinese Constitution, 

however, in reality it does not exist. 

Liu overcame the authorities’ restrictions on independent organizations and made the Chinese PEN center the first independent organization that protects freedom of expression and promotes Chinese literature in mainland China. 

The second main activity that Liu was involved in was drafting 

and organizing the signatories for Charter 08. Of the over 300 signatories of Charter 08, one-third of them were introduced by Liu 

Xiaobo to this cause. By doing that, he has become a leader in the 

Chinese civil society movement. 

In 2008, Liu Xiaobo was arrested. In 2010, he was awarded the 

Nobel prize. The honor of the Nobel Peace Prize had elevated Liu 

Xiaobo to a new status. Although Liu’s contributions cannot be 

measured solely through his prize, this honor nevertheless places 

him directly at the heart of any future sociopolitical transitions in 

China. 

The Chinese Communist Party’s totalitarianism has created severe social crisis. No matter if the regime admits it or not, it is inevitable for China to have democratic reform. Liu Xiaobo, an intellectual who has fought for China’s human rights for over 20 years 

since Tiananmen as an advocate for beliefs such as non-violence 

and non-enemy and as the only Nobel laureate that is still living 

in China, will be sure to play an essential role in this transformation. 

China’s democratization will not only relieve 1.3 billion Chinese 

people from a totalitarian regime and ensure legal protection for 

basic human rights, it will also generate a new round of global democratization and will speed up the transformation for authoritarian countries like North Korea, Iran, and Cuba. In this regard, 

the impact Liu Xiaobo has on the progress of human society should 

be no less than Mandela of South Africa, Havel of the Czech Republic, Kim Tajume of South Korea, and Aung San Suu Kyi of 

Myanmar. 

Similar to Mandela, Havel, Kim Tajume, and Aung San Suu Kyi, 

Liu Xiaobo should have the support from both his countrymen and 

people of the rest of the world. So here I would like to call for the 

leadership of the United States, especially the forward-looking 

leadership such as President Obama, to support Liu Xiaobo’s cause. 

Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you very much, Mr. Yu. 

Liu Min? 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Yu appears in the appendix.] 

STATEMENT OF LIU MIN, WIFE OF YU JIE; FRIEND OF LIU 

XIAOBO AND LIU XIA 

Ms. LIU. Good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Liu 

Min. My husband Yu Jie and I met Liu Xiaobo and his wife in 

1999. Shortly after, we became very close friends. Liu Xiaobo and 
14 

Liu Xia began their romantic relationship in the early 1990s. After 

the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, Liu Xiaobo was imprisoned for the first time. 

After his release, Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia fell deeply in love. During this time, Liu Xiaobo was imprisoned for a second and then a 

third time. In the period when Liu Xiaobo was sent to Dalian to 

be reeducated through labor, Liu Xia went to see him every month 

from Beijing, traveling back and forth 38 times over three years. 

The trip between Beijing and Dalian was 1,250 miles. 

Then after fighting for time again, they had a wedding in prison. 

Their only celebration was a simple lunch in the labor camp cafeteria. In these three years, it was the only time they had eaten at 

the same table. 

The pressure faced by Liu Xia was even greater than that of Liu 

Xiaobo. She was originally a proud painter and photographer who 

kept her distance from politics. Simply by being Liu Xiaobo’s wife, 

she was included on the list of enemies of the state. 

Permanently unable to live a normal person’s life, she developed 

eye problems, endocrine disorders, insomnia, skin illnesses, and severe depression. She had to take large doses of sleeping pills to fall 

asleep every night. 

After Liu Xiaobo was arrested, a friend asked her about how she 

was sleeping. She said, ‘‘Now that Liu Xiaobo is gone I can actually 

sleep more peacefully. A shoe had fallen down from the ceiling long 

ago. For many years, I was like the person waiting for the other 

shoe to drop. Now the shoe has finally dropped and I can finally 

feel at peace. 

Liu Xia and Liu Xiaobo have been married for many years and 

they have never had children. Liu Xia said, ‘‘A long time ago we 

agreed not to have children. Having a father in prison in any case 

is the cruelest thing to a boy or a girl.’’ 

In December 2008, Liu Xiaobo was arrested. On Christmas 2009, 

Liu Xiaobo was sentenced to 11 years in prison and was later sent 

to the prison in Jinzhou to serve his term. If Liu Xiaobo is to serve 

his term in full, Liu Xia will have traveled back and forth between 

Beijing and Jinzhou more than 100 times. The trip between Beijing 

and Jinzhou is about 600 miles. In total, her trek will have been 

more than 8,000 miles. 

In January 2012, our family of three finally escaped China and 

came to America. Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia’s predicaments were on 

our minds constantly, especially Liu Xia being under house arrest 

and isolated from the world for over two years. We worry about her 

physical and mental state. 

In my own personal experience when my husband and I were put 

under house arrest for two months, we were together but alive. All 

of our means of contact were cut off where we could not take one 

step out of our own door, where we could not see a single other person on the outside and drove us nearly insane. Liu Xia is alone. 

Under house arrest for more than two years, that kind of suffering 

is unbearable. I hope that the American Government can help her. 

I hope you can help her. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Liu appears in the appendix.] 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you so much for your testimony. 
15 

Thank you all for bearing witness on behalf of a man, Liu 

Xiaobo, and an equally courageous woman, his wife, Liu Xia, that 

cries out for even stronger voices being raised in the West, and 

really everywhere else in the world. I often am concerned when it 

comes to human rights that some people get compassion fatigue or 

fatigue of some kind, and while they raise their voice initially in 

the beginning, the dictatorship, wherever it may be—and that includes the Beijing dictatorship—they believe that if they just wait 

it out, that the concern, the anger, the outrage will just simply dissipate and go away. 

At least three of you have made an appeal to President Obama 

to raise the issue. Mr. Griffith, you pointed out that he raised it 

initially. I would note parenthetically that when Hu Jintao came 

to town I put together a very strong group of dissidents who asked 

the President to raise the issue boldly, visibly, overtly in a public 

setting, not just perhaps behind closed doors, and to raise the case 

of a fellow Nobel Peace Prize winner, Liu Xiaobo, and to do so in 

a way that the world would be energized and know that the United 

States of America cares about this man, and everyone else in China 

who is suffering under the cruelty of this dictatorship. 

Sadly, he did not. It was so bad that the Washington Post, in an 

editorial after the joint press conference, wrote, ‘‘President Obama 

Defends Hu Jintao on Rights.’’ When asked by the Associated Press 

reporter about human rights, Hu Jintao had some trouble understanding what the question was, some technical problem which was 

nonsense. 

The President said they have a different culture and they have 

a different political system, which I thought was an insult, frankly, 

to the Chinese people, including some of the leaders and people 

who have suffered at our witness table themselves, and to everyone 

else, like Chen Guangcheng and Gao Zhisheng and so many others, 

and everyone else who was at Tiananmen Square. 

The culture fully understands that everyone deserves fundamental human rights, and Dr. Yang, you certainly know it because 

you paid the price as well. So my hope springs eternal that the 

President will find it within his heart to speak out publicly on behalf of Liu Xiaobo. I waited this week to hear something from the 

President. Human Rights Day came and passed. 

Through your requests again today, we will convey that to the 

White House in the hope that he will find the courage to speak out 

to Beijing, and to do so in a way that is unmistakable not just to 

Beijing and to the new president there, unelected as he is, but also 

to the world. So if any of you would like to speak to that issue— 

Patrick, you did certainly raise it in your comments—because I 

have been disappointed. 

I thought, as did everyone else, if not us, who? We can have 

hearings. Congress, Speaker Boehner, Nancy Pelosi. People could 

raise these issues. But there is only one President of the United 

States. He is the leader of the free world. When you have a Nobel 

Peace Prize winner who languishes and a wife who is treated so 

cruelly by a dictatorship, it seems to me that it is time to find our 

voice and that voice needs to be in the White House. 

Mr. Griffith? 
16 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you, Chairman Smith. I would agree with 

that sentiment. I know that frequently there is a discussion, particularly among human rights activists, about whether it is best to 

be publicly critical or just privately critical, and what the appropriate combination of tactics is. I think that is a legitimate debate. 

But from our perspective, it has now been two years and our ultimate goal is the release of Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia. 

So far, what has been done has unfortunately not been sufficient 

to bring their release about, and I think that in light of that, in 

light of the two-year anniversary, from our perspective, in light of 

a closing window of a time where we have someone who is both a 

Nobel Peace Prize laureate and the President of the United States, 

I think it is a great opportunity now to publicly confront the Chinese authorities about their continued detention and to do so in a 

way that forces a real dialogue, instead of two ships passing in the 

night or two sequential monologues, to confront them about the 

facts of the case, to confront them about the continued detention 

of Liu Xia. 

When the government says she is not under detention, then a 

visit by the Ambassador, perhaps, or a visit by somebody from the 

embassy perhaps before that meeting trying to meet with her so 

that the response can be forceful and can say, ‘‘No, you are not telling us the truth.’’ 

We believe that that kind of increase in tactics would hopefully 

bring about a release. We know that Dr. Yang—for example, his 

case was repeatedly raised at a high level and that is ultimately 

what it took to obtain his freedom. 

Chairman SMITH. Would anyone else like to address that? 

[No response]. 

Chairman SMITH. Let me ask, you, Mr. Gershman, talked about 

the Chinese Government. ‘‘Brittle and unstable,’’ I think, were the 

words you used. One of the most under-appreciated in terms of its 

enormous impact that it is having and will have on China is the 

one-child-per-couple policy. Perhaps any one of our panelists might 

want to speak to it. 

But the Chinese Government prides itself on the idea of stability, 

and perhaps the most destabilizing current event that is heading 

toward a catastrophic implosion of Chinese society is the one-childper-couple policy, particularly the missing girls. There is an estimation of perhaps as many as 100 million girls that are missing. 

Nobody knows for sure. 

But the fact that Chinese society has been so altered by the coercive population control, the forced abortion. As you mentioned, Dr. 

Yang, in your statement when you mentioned a litany of abuses occurring, forced abortion is among the most egregious. It certainly 

has malaffected virtually every woman in China, witness the fact 

that they have 500 suicides per day of females in the People’s Republic of China. 

There is even a book. I recently, a little over a year ago, chaired 

a hearing. We heard from a woman who wrote the book, ‘‘Bare 

Branches,’’ and talked about how destabilizing forced abortion is. 

Not only is it inhumane and equivalent to what the Nazis did 

against Polish women during World War II with forced abortion— 

so the outrage from a human rights and women’s rights point of 
17 

view cannot be overstated, as well as the missing children who are 

destroyed, and missing girls in particular. 

But the destabilizing effect it is going to have, and this author 

pointed out that it could ultimately lead to war and the projection 

of power. It will lead to gangs, it will lead to all kinds of destabilization. You mentioned, Mr. Gershman, about how there are 500 

protests per day of some sort, so there is already a fomenting of 

unhappiness that is now matriculating into an ability to go out on 

the streets and actually show it with less fear, although there is 

fear of what the secret police might do to them. 

So if you could, Patrick, or maybe Dr. Yang, speak to that issue. 

It seems to me that it is only a matter of time before there is an 

implosion economically, as well as societally, because of the onechild-per-couple policy. 

Mr. GERSHMAN. Well, Mr. Chairman, first of all, you mentioned 

human rights fatigue. I really want to pay tribute to you. I mean, 

there has just been nobody—as I look around this room at Ben Gilman, Henry Hyde, Dante Fascell, and Tom Lantos, I mean, you belong in that company, you really do. You have done really heroic 

work and I want to congratulate you for it. 

As I look at the situation, it has changed fundamentally in 

China. Liu Xiaobo has written about that. One of his really most 

important essays for which he was imprisoned was called ‘‘Changing the Regime by Changing Society.’’ He talked about the way the 

pillars of totalitarianism in China, the ideology, the economy, the 

organizational control, even the Party political control, either have 

broken down completely or are in the process of breaking down. 

The one point he emphasized most strongly, which is something 

you just said, is the issue of fear. There was a time when, if people 

protested, they were isolated and ostracized. ‘‘Today,’’ he said in 

that essay, ‘‘such people become the civic conscience of society and 

heroes of truth.’’ So it has turned this issue on its head. There is 

no stopping this. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I think the President and 

others need to speak out much, much more strongly. 

China, because it is such a big country, gets off scot-free on a 

whole host of issues. You have pointed to some of the most critical, 

but there are many other issues that we have not even spoken 

about today and it gets off from this criticism. 

But I think our leadership, the leadership of other countries, 

have to realize that China is indeed unstable. This is not just rhetoric at a congressional hearing. The numbers of protests, which 

have increased so dramatically, are increasing approximately 12 

percent every year: less than 10,000 less than 20 years ago, and 

we are now over 200,000 a year. 

There is profound discontent. The Internet has just revolutionized the situation where it has transformed the consciousness. We 

know from someone like Chen Guangcheng and his work that this 

is a grassroots movement. It is a movement that has now spread 

outside the major urban centers and exists throughout the country 

in the rural areas. 

China has to find a way to deal with this. Its fundamental flaw, 

Mr. Chairman, its fundamental flaw, is that it does not have real 

legitimacy as a government. Governments can’t survive without le-
18 

gitimacy. It has never been elected. It is either going to have to 

make this transition or the world is in very serious trouble. 

I think that it is extremely important that you keep the issue at 

the center, that we quote from Liu Xiaobo, his essays, at every opportunity, that we educate about what he said, because his message really represents the hope for China’s future. 

I think everyone here wants to see China have a strong, healthy, 

and successful future, but the only way it is going to do that is if 

it addresses the kinds of issues that Liu Xiaobo has raised, especially having to do with reconciliation, especially having to do with 

respect for individual human rights. 

Chairman SMITH. Dr. Yang? Thank you. 

Mr. YANG. It usually takes four factors to be present at the same 

time to change a country from an autocratic country to a democratic one: (1) the robust, general disaffection from people; (2) split 

in the leadership in the autocratic regime; (3) viable opposition, 

viable democracy movement; and (4) international support. 

Now, looking at what is happening in China, as I said in my 

opening remarks, the intellectuals are weakening, evidenced by the 

return of democracy debate around China’s leadership change. The 

intellectuals’ renewed demand for democracy is, at least in part, 

based on their understanding of the reality of China’s state crony 

capitalism. This state crony capitalism has spanned the long period 

of economic growth, which has become nearly the only one source 

of legitimacy for CCP’s rule in China. 

However, such an economic system has extracted incalculable 

costs from its people by tolerating human rights abuses, environmental deterioration, and morality collapse. That system has come 

almost to a dead end. We all know from the news that the Chinese 

economy is taking a downturn. The slowing economy will lay bare 

already-existing conflict between the people and the government. 

Regarding viable opposition, I mentioned in my opening remarks 

that Liu Xiaobo will play an important role in integrating the 

idealists such as himself with the self-motivated protests on a 

grassroots level to form that necessary, viable opposition in China. 

He will play a pivotal role in forming a group of leaders who are 

able to represent the people, who are able to disrupt the political 

order, who are able to call for international attention and support, 

and who are able to engage with the Chinese Government effectively, either through resistance or negotiations. 

As to the issue of international support, about which I have some 

doubt because I am able to speak from personal experience. In the 

past several years, I have been advocating for human rights for 

China within the international community and have been amazed 

by a well-trenched myth believed by world leaders and policymakers and scholars. 

This myth goes as follows—that because China will punish those 

taking a strong stance on human rights with its growing economic 

power, affecting their all-important trade relations with China, the 

human rights issue should take a backseat. 

But this myth is anything but tested. So I just want to repeat 

the questions I asked at last Thursday’s hearing in the European 

Parliament: What are we afraid of? This is a myth. We have to test 

it. The questions we should ask are: What do you think China will 
19 

do in response to a strong human rights stance? Do we really believe that China will quit trading with a country whose goods it 

needs because that country demands better treatment of its citizenry? There is no past evidence in our relationships with China 

to support this myth. 

How much will it affect your economy, the United States’ economy for example, and are you willing or able to accept this outcome? How much will it affect China’s economy and what does it 

mean to the political system? Will China be willing or able to accept the cost? So let us calculate how much we spend on the Iraq 

war, which toppled a dictator. 

If China really retaliates against this country with its economic 

power, how much are we willing to pay to topple China’s dictatorship? We all know the only source of legitimacy, for this regime to 

continue is economic well-being. 

So I think that is the least thing that they would try to jeopardize, so I think some fear—Mr. Carl Gershman talked about fear 

that works in China, but fear also works in the international community. I found this to be self-imposed fear. We have to test this 

myth to break it. Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Dr. Yang, I think your point is extremely well 

taken. The Chinese Government relies on an export strategy. Our 

balance of trade is approximately $300 billion in their favor. Where 

would Beijing find markets, the likes of which would be the United 

States, if we found our voice at every level, especially at the White 

House level, on human rights? 

We would see, at least on the margin if not even more than that, 

I believe, the release of prisoners, including Liu Xiaobo, if we took 

seriously our obligation and did not act out of fear, which has led 

to a muting of our concern. So your point, I think, was extremely 

well taken. 

Those who argue that our debt, I would just say for the record, 

$1 trillion out of $16 trillion worth of debt. The Chinese also need 

to rely on our continual solvency and well-being for their own economist interests, not just from an export strategy. So it is such an 

ill-conceived form of fear, not based on reality. 

Frankly, it goes back to the early 1990s. Bill Clinton linked 

human rights with trade and I, as a Republican, applauded that 

Democrat in the White House robustly, with press conferences and 

statements on the House floor. 

Before the year was out, he delinked most-favored-nation status 

on May 26, 1994, late on a Friday afternoon. That sent a signal to 

Beijing that profits trump human rights. My hope is that we will 

finally, some day—hopefully soon—find our voice to say we do not 

even have to fear the economic negatives. That trading relationship 

will be robust no matter what. 

What we do fear is a dictatorship that grows, expands its bad 

form of governance and exports it to Africa and to other countries 

and forms alliances that are antithetical to democracy and human 

rights. So we do not act in our own interest, not to mention the 

Chinese leaders like the three of you who have done so much as 

China’s best, and bravest, and brightest who are now abroad, 

speaking out on behalf of those left behind. 
20 

So I think your point is extraordinarily well taken. It is a myth. 

I would concur with you on that. Rather than a backseat, I would 

say we often take a ‘‘no seat’’ when it comes to human rights. We 

are nowhere to be found. We are AWOL as a government, and we 

need to do more. 

Mr. Yu, you, in your testimony, really went into some wonderful 

length as to who Liu Xiaobo is as a man, his courage. You talked 

about his activism, that he refused to give up, to be discouraged, 

or even to feel a hint of anxiety about the increasingly 

marginalizing position that he had within society, even after being 

held in prison. How is Liu Xiaobo doing now? Do we have any good 

sense, any sense whatsoever how he is holding up under the strain, 

under this terrible oppression that he faces? I would ask Liu Min 

if you could speak to Liu Xia’s well-being as well. We know of the 

most recent conversation she had with the AP reporters. 

I mean, Cochairman Brown and I were talking as this hearing 

got under way how in awe we are of those who suffer in prison, 

and their loved ones. Frankly, both he and I, and I would say that 

for most of us, do not know how we would react. If we were put 

under this iron fist policy of a dictatorship that can beat and torture at will, hoping someday to be free, sticking to your convictions, 

it is incredible. Dr. Yang, obviously you faced it personally when 

you were imprisoned. But if you could speak to Liu Xiaobo, how he 

is faring now, if we know. 

Mr. YU. From the information that I obtained, I understand that 

Liu Xiaobo was not imposed with physical torture in prison. However, he was not given enough nutrition and since the prison is located in the northern part of China, the heating system is very bad 

so he is feeling extremely cold in that situation. So it is not very 

comfortable for him. 

His wife, Liu Xia, could visit him, could bring books to him. However, these books need to be very seriously inspected first. These 

books have to be only published within China. These books cannot 

be published in Hong Kong or elsewhere outside China. In terms 

of the category of books he is allowed to read, he is allowed to read 

fiction and poems. Anything that is related to political science is 

not allowed. 

Liu Xiaobo once said no matter how long he was put in prison 

he would not leave China. This has become a reason for what 

China is doing, a Chinese conspiracy that is going on now. The Chinese Government is now trying to detain Liu Xia and trying to impose pressure on her in order to make Liu Xiaobo give up. So I 

think what we can do right now is to try to get freedom for Liu 

Xia. 

In terms of what the United States can do in this cause, I call 

for President Obama to openly call for the freedom of Liu Xiaobo, 

and also I hope President Obama could sign his name on the joint 

signatories, along with the other 135 Nobel Peace Prize laureates. 

Also, I hope that the Ambassador to Beijing from the United States 

could have opportunities to visit Liu Xia. These are the things that 

we can do immediately. 

Liu Xiaobo has a very well-known writing which is called, ‘‘The 

Future of the Free China Lies in its Civil Society.’’ This book tells 

us that when we are looking at the changes of China, this is the 
21 

thing for both Chinese people and people of the world, we do not 

only look at the change in its high leadership level, we also look 

at the change in civil society, which includes the development of 

the Internet, the situation of the house churches, and the situation 

of the rights defenders lawyers. 

However, what we see recently is, after the 18th Chinese Congress, the Western media, the Western think tanks are all putting 

their focus on the leadership transition, pinning their hopes on the 

potential reforms that the new president, Xi Jinping, can bring 

about to the society. I think this is a repeated mistake that we saw 

10 years ago when President Hu Jintao took office. 

So by saying this, I hope that the Western world, the Western 

media, could get themselves familiarized with the idea expressed 

by Liu Xiaobo that the hope lies in the Chinese civil society. 

Chairman SMITH. Did you want to speak? 

Ms. LIU. No, thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Okay. 

Mr. Griffith, you mentioned in your testimony that the U.N. 

Working Group on Arbitrary Detention had found that Liu Xiaobo’s 

detention was arbitrary under international law. 

What does that mean in terms of, what is the consequence for 

that? What has the U.N. Human Rights Council done, if anything? 

We know Manfred Nowak, some years ago—the Special Rapporteur 

on Torture—did an excellent expose ́ of the systemic use of torture 

in China against prisoners. But the Human Rights Council is an 

institution that has at least the broad power to expose—not enforce 

much, but expose—abuse. 

What did the U.N. Arbitrary Detention Unit do in followup, and 

what about the Human Rights Council? 

Mr. GRIFFITH. With respect to the Working Group on Arbitrary 

Detention, as a non-treaty body they do not have a binding effect, 

even technically binding effect, on China, unfortunately. They are 

best thought of, I think, as a body of independent experts. They 

speak, I think, with great authority, both on what China’s obligations under international law are—of course they are a signatory 

but not party to the International Covenant on Civil and Political 

Rights [ICCPR], unfortunately—but their opinion does, we believe, 

carry a great deal of weight and they do, in some respects, speak 

on behalf of the United Nations. Insofar as they do have that authority, it then becomes the job of the activists to enforce that opinion. Unfortunately, it is not self-enforcing, so it is then our job to 

hold it up and to use it to hold the Chinese Government accountable. 

With respect to the Human Rights Committee, unfortunately, because China is not a party to the ICCPR and therefore not a party 

to the optional protocol, the Human Rights Committee does not 

have jurisdiction to hear the individual case of Liu with respect to 

the human rights. 

Chairman SMITH. But they do a periodic review. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. My understanding is the Human Rights Council. 

Chairman SMITH. That’s what I meant. I said the council. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Oh, I apologize. 

Chairman SMITH. Yes. 
22 

Mr. GRIFFITH. There are too many bodies. The Human Rights 

Council does the periodic review. My understanding is, they have 

looked at and discussed Liu Xiaobo’s case in the context of that review and will be considering China once again coming up. I believe 

the submissions are due in just a few months, and they will certainly be receiving a submission from at least our organization, and 

I believe a number of others. 

Chairman SMITH. Dr. Yang? 

Mr. YANG. When it comes to the EU—to the United Nations; I 

just came back from the EU—we should remember the fact that 

China is a member of the United Nations, a member of the Human 

Rights Council. China is a leading human rights violator. It has sat 

on that Council. So inevitably, the international human rights 

standards will become substandards based upon China’s own actions toward its people. 

We have joined efforts with many rights groups from all past 

wars to stop China’s bid to be reelected to the Human Rights Council in about a year. China’s membership will expire at the end of 

this year because it has already served its full two terms and it has 

to wait for another year, for one year, to become eligible to be reelected. So we have a joint effort now to stop China from being reelected. 

Here, I call on the U.S. Congress to pass a resolution to direct 

the State Department to at least come up with conditional support 

of China’s membership on the U.N. Human Rights Council. The 

condition can be that the United States should not support China’s 

membership at the U.N. Human Rights Council, but only when 

China releases Liu Xiaobo and all of the political prisoners. 

I want to echo what Yu Jie just said about Liu Xiaobo’s situation. 

I want to point out that usually the family members suffer more 

than the prisoners. The dissidents, to a certain degree, are prepared to be prisoners in China. We discussed this. Liu Xiaobo and 

I discussed this issue in 2007, not long after I was imprisoned. He 

literally said that he was feeling guilty about his family members, 

the torment they underwent, and that he had a very strong sense 

he would be detained again very soon. He expressed that regret 

and guilty feeling to me toward family members. 

So on the subject of the wife of Liu Xiaobo—Liu Xia’s situation. 

Everybody knows how she is suffering. I just want to echo Patrick 

and Yu Jie’s call. Actually, that has been our call for two months, 

for the world ambassadors and diplomats in China to make a visit 

with Liu Xia. 

Liu Xia is a normal citizen. The Chinese Government has never 

brought any charges against her. Legally, she is just a regular citizen. It is alright for a diplomat in Beijing to make such a request. 

I just want to repeat what we said in the petition calling for the 

ambassadors to visit Liu Xia. 

‘‘When history’s pen writes about your time, represents your 

country in China, you will want its ink to clearly underline your 

having made the case for Dr. Liu’s release and his wife’s freedom. 

Rather than showing a stain of indifference, don’t miss an opportunity to make this moral gesture. Place this visit on your calendar. Insist on necessary arrangements.’’ 

Thank you. 
23 

Chairman SMITH. Dr. Yang, thank you. That is something we 

will follow up as a Commission as well. It is a point very well 

taken. 

Coming to the conclusion, and I would ask if you have any final 

statement you would like to make, or comments or insights, but I 

would note, Mr. Griffith, that the Chinese Government counts on, 

I believe, naivete and the ability to manipulate U.S. media. 

You made an excellent point, I think, about how everyone is concerned about the transition and they are all caught up in this transition to the new president—unelected, again, but the new president—rather than missing the house churches, and all the other 

daily abominations committed by this dictatorship against very 

good people who just want to practice their faith or express themselves on the Internet, or do something that freedom-loving people 

can do in most other places of the world. 

But this naivete—I will never forget when top Chinese officials 

were making their way to the United States. Maybe a week, five 

days, four days before they arrived here there would be a buzz 

about how they were about to sign the International Covenant on 

Civil and Political Rights, that they were moving toward that signature. Of course it has not been ratified yet. But they milked that 

for years. 

Those who look askance when it comes to human rights in this 

country, including some of the most powerful interests, including a 

number of politicians, would cling to that and say, ‘‘See, they are 

about to sign the International Covenant on Civil and Political 

Rights, so cut them a break, you critics.’’ 

Meanwhile the people in the prisons, meanwhile the women subjected to the cruelty of forced abortion. Meanwhile, the religious 

practitioners of Falun Gong, and all the other believers, the 

Uyghurs, the Buddhists, the underground Christians, continue to 

be savaged by this dictatorship. It is amazing to me. I have been 

here 32 years as a Member of Congress and I’ve been working on 

China since I got here on human rights. 

Of course, it went to an accelerated mode post Tiananmen 

Square when we all realized that the lid was lifted as never before, 

that there were possibilities. But how naive, how naive. Maybe it 

is purposeful naivete, but it is nevertheless a naivete that enables, 

however unwittingly, the dictatorship and this cruelty. So thank 

you for bringing those points up. 

We will contact our Ambassador, ask that he visit the wife of Liu 

Xiaobo. And why hasn’t he to date? But past does not have to be 

prologue; we will encourage him to go and do just that. Again, hope 

springs eternal that the President will find his voice on this as well 

and sign the letter, as was mentioned, Dr. Yang, of the Nobel laureates on behalf of Liu Xiaobo. He is a Nobel laureate. Sign the letter. 

So any final comments that any of our distinguished witnesses 

would like to make before we adjourn? 

Mr. GERSHMAN. No. Again, Mr. Chairman, I just want to thank 

you for being a leader on this issue. It is just of extraordinary importance and you are really having an impact. Thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you. 
24 

Mr. YANG. I want to echo Mr. Carl Gershman to thank you. I 

first testified at a hearing hosted by you back in 1995 on 

Tiananmen Square. On that occasion, China’s Defense Minister Chi 

Haotian was visiting here in Washington, DC. 

I do have a few comments. I think the world democracies have 

run into a collective action dilemma. Unilaterally dealing with 

China may not be as effective as a multilateral mechanism. So I 

urge the U.S. Government to take the lead in forming a multilateral approach of governments dealing with China’s human rights 

crisis, the Tibetan crisis, and the political prisoners— i.e., all of the 

human rights crises. I think that will work more effectively than 

unilaterally dealing with China. 

I believe that the Chinese Government is paying great attention 

to this hearing. So, I have a special message to Xi Jinping: Mr. Xi 

Jinping, since you are now just taking over the helm of Chinese 

leadership, you well may be spared the blame for the repressive 

policies adopted and implemented by your predecessors. But, if you 

wait too long to make important changes, all blame will rightly be 

placed upon you as well. I understand that implementing a systemic political change in China will be very complex, and I cannot 

expect anybody to finish it overnight, but one can begin with such 

small, simple things as returning freedom to Liu Xia. 

Thank you. 

Mr. GRIFFITH. Thank you, Chairman Smith. The only thing that 

I would add is to reiterate your comment about human rights fatigue, particularly in high-profile cases like Liu Xiaobo’s, and to 

thank you again. These hearings are essential from an activist perspective in continuing to garner attention about these cases and I 

would only thank you again for inviting me to speak today. 

Mr. YU. Also, I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving this 

opportunity to attend this hearing. My final remarks are, although 

recently we have heard some kind of sentiment regarding nationalism in China where you hear some kind of opposition to Western 

ideas inside the country, but here I want to assure you that most 

Chinese people really like America, really like America’s values. So 

if America wants to elevate its reputation in China it should persist in its values of human rights and freedom instead of putting 

business profits on top of everything. 

We recently heard Wal-Mart has established a Party secretary 

department in its office in Beijing. This would really damage the 

American image inside China an that is not a good idea. So I hope 

once again that the American leadership could keep its voice for 

human rights and let this idea spread even more. Thank you. 

Ms. LIU. No, thank you. 

Chairman SMITH. Thank you. 

On that note, the hearing is adjourned. Thank you so much. 

[Whereupon, at 11:49 a.m. the hearing was adjourned.] 
(25) 

A P P E N D I X 
26 

PREPARED STATEMENTS

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CARL GERSHMAN

DECEMBER 12, 2012

I want to thank Chairman Smith and Cochairman Brown for inviting me to testify today. I would like to take this opportunity to address briefly three issues: The 

dangerous instability of China’s political system and its immense human costs; the 

importance of a peaceful democratic transition as the best way of ensuring stability; 

and finally, the recognition that Liu Xiaobo and Charter 08 are part of a broad popular movement within China which represents the best hope for democratic transition. 

The recent scandals around Chongqing Party Secretary Bo Xilai and his failed bid 

for power in the Party leadership transition provide a valuable glimpse into the way 

the Chinese government operates. We see how brutal struggles unconstrained by 

formalized rules and due process are still the norm for the Party, from top to bottom. And this vulnerability of the Party echoes throughout the political system. The 

Chinese state is brittle and unstable, and many inside China worry the country is 

headed for a social explosion. According to the well-known Chinese scholar Yu 

Jianrong, for example, the government sees the ‘‘expression of people’s legitimate interests’’ as a threat to the social order. Land rights for peasants, food safety for children, wages for workers, residency rights for rural migrants in the urban area, and 

minority rights for Tibetans or Uyghurs—all are undermined by government repression. The law, meanwhile, provides little refuge. What modest gains the legal system had made have seen a back-slide. The blind activist Chen Guangcheng, whose 

brave escape from the security apparatus early this year highlights the level of repression, calls the Chinese system ‘‘lawless.’’ 

Lured by extraordinary profiteering opportunities, the Party bureaucracy has become increasingly predatory. Consequently, the number of collective protests has 

been rising steadily: from 9,700 in 1993, to 90,000 in 2006, to 180,000 in 2010, to 

over 200,000 in 2011, an average of about 500 a day. As the government ramps up 

its security budget to ‘‘maintain stability,’’ human costs mount. 

In Tibet, government controls are so tight that comparisons have been made to 

a war zone. To protest their lack of religious and political freedom, 95 Tibetans, 82 

men and 13 women, have self-immolated since 2009. Constant repression of Uyghur 

culture and a lack of opportunity because of open discrimination of Uyghurs have 

resulted in deep resentment and hardening ethnic tension. A level of government 

control unlike anywhere else in China has become the norm in Xinjiang, with forced 

disappearances of Uyghurs after the June 2009 unrest and long prison terms for 

Uyghur journalists and bloggers providing a narrative at odds with the official one. 

Across China, demolitions and land appropriations deprive many of hard-earned 

property and livelihood. Chinese economist Wu Jinglian estimates that the government has deprived farmers of $500 billion in property value during the drive for development. News and photos of people self-immolating in protest have become a staple of social media. Increasing desperation and the inability of the current system 

to provide long-term guarantees of rights and liberties lead to more protests, and 

the vicious cycle spirals downward. 

Even under these bleak conditions, a social movement has arisen in which ordinary people seek to use the law on behalf of China’s people. It takes corrupt officials, police and the government to court for malfeasance and injustice. It organizes 

peaceful demonstrations to educate other citizens and rallies support for their cause. 

It posts messages about rights violations on the Internet when the press turns them 

away. Individuals associated with the movement either run as independent candidates or work as campaign volunteers in sham local elections, trying to lend the 

process legitimacy. They call the secret police on behalf of human rights defenders, 

and show up at police stations and black jails for advocacy and rescue. Chen 

Guangcheng’s moral resistance and ultimate escape were the focus of such a human 

rights campaign—one of the largest since the founding of the People’s Republic. And 

their voices are growing. Tens of millions of Internet users ‘‘gather and gawk’’ online 

at stories of corruption and human rights violations to show support for their fellow 

citizens and create pressure for more accountability. 

Again, the human costs are high. These human rights defenders receive no help 

from establishment intellectuals or lawyers from their localities. The courts either 

refuse to take their cases or put on mock trials. They are defenseless against police 

violence. They are often illegally detained, tortured and sentenced to labor camp 
27 

without anyone hearing about it. Human rights lawyers and public intellectuals join 

them, at considerable risk to themselves, to address China’s lawlessness. 

The writings of Nobel Peace laureate Liu Xiaobo and Charter 08 should be seen 

in this context. Liu has tirelessly pushed for political change by asking the state 

to live up to its own laws and obligations. The Charter calls for gradual political 

reforms: rule of law, the separation of powers, and a multi-party system. Its signatories, a diverse body comprising both prominent figures within the system and ordinary people at the grassroots, are united behind its common vision of a democratic 

China. It is part and parcel of the broad bottom-up movement for popular constitutionalism and gradual change. As we have seen in the success stories of South 

Korea and Taiwan, such social movements are among the best guarantors of peaceful transition to a robust democracy. 

To date, the Chinese government has chosen a path different from the one envisioned by civil society. To keep widespread dissatisfaction at bay, the government 

encourages nationalism and stokes popular anger in order to bolster its legitimacy. 

In September, the government encouraged a wave of anti-Japanese demonstrations, 

which turned violent in many places. It correctly gauges that nationalism serves as 

a powerful instrument in impeding public demand for democratic change. Simultaneously, the party’s proactive repression has kept civil society fragmented, fragile, 

beset by doubt, and still largely unable to mount meaningful monitoring of the government’s performance and adherence to both domestic and international obligations. 

Such a strategy however, may open China up to great danger, with grave implications for the entire world. The instability of the current system may eventually end 

in large-scale and bloody repression or, equally disastrously, in violent upheaval. 

China may decide to step up an aggressive stance abroad to consolidate support and 

distract criticism by fomenting nationalist antagonism. By so doing, it could inadvertently provoke conflict. Given China’s geopolitical significance and the vital role 

it plays in the international economic order, all these outcomes would create disruptions that travel far beyond the region. Most importantly, the human costs for the 

Chinese people would be unthinkable. 

We have reason to believe, then, that civil society’s fight to open up the political 

system to the Chinese people represents the only desirable alternative to the status 

quo. The movement can help bridge the vast ideological, income, and social divisions 

splintering China through political liberalization, the protection of basic rights, and 

the pursuit of social justice. Congress and the Administration, as well as the American public, have a golden opportunity to act in a bipartisan manner in calling for 

Liu Xiaobo’s release, not only as a matter of justice and human rights, but also to 

enable him to take part in civic debate on the fraught challenge of democratic transformation of China. 

Let us hope that the new Chinese leadership will recognize this historic opportunity. In doing so, they would avert the profound crisis facing their country, and 

open up prospects of a free China, whose power and prosperity would be strengthened through democracy. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF YANG JIANLI

DECEMBER 12, 2012

It is a great honor for me to speak about the significance of Liu Xiaobo in a democratic change in China. I want to begin by asking this question: Why is China, a 

seemingly increasingly assertive world power, afraid of a single man like Liu 

Xiaobo? Why is it afraid of a moderate document like Charter 08, a manifesto authored by Liu Xiaobo and his colleagues in China demanding for political reform? 

The answer can only be that the rulers of China understand just how unjust, 

therefore weak, their system is and how significant Liu Xiaobo is for a democratic 

change. 

Liu Xiaobo and his colleagues recognize there are two Chinas. They have tried 

to bring together these two severely separated Chinas and construct a society built 

upon universal values of public political life. 

By ‘‘two China,’’ I am not trying to distinguish ‘‘mainland China’’ from ‘‘Taiwan.’’ 

Geographically there is only one entity of mainland China, but politically, economically, sociologically, and even sentimentally, it has largely broken into two societies. 

Over the past 20 some years after Tiananmen Square, the CCP regime has established a two China structure and one of the two Chinas, which I call China, Inc. 

is formed by 

1. Red Capitalists 
28 

2. Marriage between Power and Capital 

3. Shares open to domestic and foreign capitalists 

4. Shares free to intellectuals 

Today, China Inc. is dazzling the entire world with its wealth, might and glory. 

It dominates the public discourse that outside observers believe that it represents 

China—the whole of China. 

The truth is there is another society named China, a society constituted of over 

a billion Chinese who are virtually slave-laborers working for China, Inc. I call this 

second China the under China. 

How do these two Chinas differ? 

1. Unprecedented wealth gap between the Chinas. 

2. Citizens of the under China are unable to enjoy basic benefits or constitutionally afforded civil and political rights. 

3. The elite monopolize over power, capital, and information. 

4. The two Chinas no longer speak a common political language. 

5. The two Chinas have no common political life. 

6. The underclass have grown more and more discontent and distrustful of 

the elite. 

On top of the traditional lies and violence, which every autocratic ruler uses, the 

CCP regime has developed new tactics to maintain the two China structure which 

is comprised of: 

One body: sustaining economic growth at all costs to maintain the regime’s ruling 

legitimacy 

Two wings: appeasing the elite with corruption and suppressing the powerless 

with rogue police 

Two claws: purging citizen advocates like Liu Xiaobo and blocking public opinion. 

Nevertheless, it is not enough to just see the severe division of the two societies 

of China. We must envision the emergence of a new, democratic China: the third 

China which is represented by people like Liu Xiaobo. 

Liu Xiaobo’s Nobel honor indicates the international recognition of the Chinese 

democracy movement represented by Liu Xiaobo. This, among other gestures, will 

even eventually help strengthen the hand of those inside the communist bureaucracy pushing for reform. Liu Xiaobo has become the symbol of democracy in China 

and moral courage and determination in struggling for that goal. Simply because 

of such a symbolism, his continued imprisonment presents itself a footnote to the 

vow made in President Hu Jintao’s political report at the recent Party’s 18th Congress that the leadership would ‘‘never take the evil road of changing flags and banners’’—code for abandoning one-party rule. This vow dispelled any doubts about the 

party’s resolve to keep its political monopoly. 

But we must remember the CCP does not have the only say about China’s future. 

Liu Xiaobo and his symbolism represents another force that will help shape the future of China as well as an alternative road in China, the evil road in the minds 

of China’s leaders perhaps. And, this force is becoming increasingly viable. 

The most important sign is the recent intellectual awakening evidenced by the return of the democracy debate which has been at the center of the public course 

around China’s leadership change. More and more intellectuals, who were generally 

co-opted by the regime not long after Tiananmen and had been acting as defenders 

of the China’s one party system, have come to realize and acknowledge the value 

of Liu Xiaobo and ideas and beliefs which are embodied in Charter 08. The intellectual recognition that the status quo is unsustainable is always the first and vital 

step towards changing it. 

Despite the division I talked about earlier, there are two often overlooked 

consensuses among 

Chinese from both societies. The first is that the present China is not ‘‘normal,’’ 

indeed ‘‘absurd’’, a word Liu Xia kept saying in her first and totally unexpected 

media interview in 26 months of her illegal house arrest. The second, perhaps 

agreed upon to a lesser degree, is that China will eventually become normal through 

democratic means. 

To find a common ground to lay the foundation for the third China, we must create a political language based on universal values that can bridge the gap between 

the two Chinas. And that is exactly what Liu Xiaobo, and Charter 08, has been intent on accomplishing. 

Change is unlikely to happen first from within the CCP regime which values stability-above-all. A breakthrough for a democratic change will surely come from the 

people. 

The Nobel Peace Prize awarded to Liu Xiaobo has a remarkable impacts on the 

hearts of the people inside China and over the past years the civil movement has 
29 

1Patrick Griffith can be contacted at pgriffith@freedom-now.org or +1 (202) 223–3733. 

become increasingly mature, skillful, and resilient as evidenced by many cases including Chen Guangcheng, Ai Weiwei, and Wukan villagers. 

Liu Xiaobo with Charter 08 is a banner. Backed by large numbers of its real-name 

signers from diverse segments of society, the Charter will continue to transform individual protests into a long-lasting movement that demands across-the- board, systematic change. 

As the non-governmental forces grow and the civil protests escalate, the struggle 

for power among different factions with the communist regime will become more 

pronounced. Once the external pressure reaches a critical mass, the rival factions 

within the CCP will have no choice but take the voices of the citizens seriously and 

seek their support to survive. 

The release of Liu Xiaobo will help signal the coming of that change. 

When a large-scale movement takes place again, as it did in 1989, we will need 

leaders to play the roles that Mandela, Havel, Walesa, and Aung San Suu Kyi have 

played in the political changes of their respective countries. We will need a group 

of civil leaders who can disrupt the political order and establish itself as the legitimate voice of the people in negotiations with the state. Liu Xiaobo, as a widely accepted leader both at home and abroad, will surely play a unique role in forming 

such a group, which was most needed but lacking in our 1989 Tiananmen movement. 

Therefore, working toward his freedom is vital for a democratic change in China. 

I am particularly encouraged by the strong support for Liu Xiaobo and Charter 08 

from world human rights leaders and activists. Aung San Suu Kyi was released 

from house arrest in November of 2010. For the first time, there is hope for reform 

in Burma. In seeking the Liu’s release, we hope and struggle for the same in China. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF PATRICK GRIFFITH1

DECEMBER 12, 2012

Good afternoon Mr. Chairman and Mr. Co-Chairman and thank you for the opportunity to join you today. The Congressional-Executive Commission is an essential 

source for information about human rights violations in China, and I want to begin 

by thanking the Commissioners and the staff for their unwavering support for prisoners of conscience. 

As an attorney with Freedom Now and as international pro bono counsel to the 

Lius, my testimony today will focus on why the detention of Dr. Liu Xiaobo and his 

wife Liu Xia is a flagrant violation of China’s obligations under international law. 

In addition to a brief discussion of recent developments in the case, I will explain 

in our view what steps the United States can take, in light of their continued detention, to lead a growing international movement to free them. 

The circumstances of Dr. Liu’s detention are widely known and largely undisputed, even by the Chinese government. Dr. Liu became a prolific essayist after 

being detained and barred from teaching or publishing in the country following his 

public support of student protesters in 1989. At the time of his arrest, Dr. Liu was 

leading an initiative called Charter ’08. Modeled on the Czechoslovakian Charter 

’77, the Chinese manifesto called for a peaceful transition to multi-party democracy 

and respect for fundamental human rights in China. Detained at an unknown location for six months, without charge or access to legal counsel, Dr. Liu was ultimately accused of ‘‘inciting subversion’’ of the state and its socialist system. The 

prosecution’s indictment, like the court’s judgment on December 25, 2009 sentencing 

Dr. Liu to 11 years in prison, specifically relied on his writings as proof of his guilt. 

Shortly after the Norwegian Nobel Committee announced the following October 

that it would award the Peace Prize to Dr. Liu, ‘‘in recognition of his long and nonviolent struggle for fundamental human rights in China,’’ the government placed Dr. 

Liu’s wife, Liu Xia, under house arrest. Two years later, she remains cut-off from 

the outside world without even the pretense of legal process. Just last week, reporters from the Associated Press managed to reach Liu Xia and described the desperate situation she faces. In her first interview in over two years, Liu Xia confirmed that she has been confined to her home, unable to communicate with the outside world, except for weekly trips to buy groceries and visit family. She described 

her continued house arrest as ‘‘painfully surreal’’ and noted that although she initially felt prepared for the consequences of the Peace Prize, she never imagined she 

would be unable to leave her home. After two years of house arrest, Liu Xia was 
30 

described as looking frail and frequently confined to bed due to back pain. ‘‘I don’t 

keep track of the days anymore’’ she said. 

The prosecution of Dr. Liu and the lack of due process afforded to him clearly violate China’s international obligations. China has signed the International Covenant 

on Civil and Political Rights, which specifically protects the right to peaceful freedom of expression. These international protections apply regardless of whether Chinese domestic law punishes peaceful political expression as ‘‘subversion’’ and the 

government’s constant refrain that Dr. Liu’s imprisonment is the result of a criminal prosecution is simply irrelevant. Further, as internationally protected rights, 

their violation is the proper concern of the international community—not merely an 

issue of domestic ‘‘judicial sovereignty.’’ 

The violation of Liu Xia’s rights is even more appalling. Despite a mountain of 

evidence to the contrary, the Chinese government has claimed that ‘‘no legal enforcement measure has been taken’’ against her. This claim is either a lie or an admission of guilt, and as amplified by the recent reports about the toll her house arrest is taking, it is also incredibly cruel. Most strikingly, Liu Xia’s continued detention is patently illegal—nothing under domestic or international law authorizes the 

indefinite detention of a person, without any due process whatsoever, for the crime 

of being married to a Nobel Laureate. 

In response to petitions filed by Freedom Now on behalf of Lius, the United Nations Working Group on Arbitrary Detention found their continued detentions to be 

arbitrary under international law. Despite this finding by the United Nations, and 

its call for their immediate release, life for Dr. Liu and Liu Xia remains unchanged 

since he received the Nobel Peace Prize two years ago. Unfortunately, this lack of 

progress can also be seen in other Chinese cases, such as that of imprisoned rights 

lawyer Gao Zhisheng. As Mr. Gao’s wife described to this Commission in February, 

the Chinese government has repeatedly disappeared and tortured Mr. Gao because 

of his support for religious minority groups, workers, and victims of land seizures. 

After holding Mr. Gao incommunicado for 20 months, the government announced at 

the end of last year that it would imprison him for an additional three years for 

allegedly violating the terms of a suspended sentence imposed in 2006 after Mr. Gao 

confessed to ‘‘inciting subversion’’ after interrogators threatened his family. As with 

Liu Xia, the total lack of due process afforded to Mr. Gao belies any notion that the 

Chinese government respects the ‘‘rule of law’’ it so frequently claims to uphold. 

While the Chinese government’s intransigence on these cases is certainly frustrating, the international movement to free the Lius is gathering cohesion and momentum. Last week, the International Committee for Liu Xiaobo, a coalition of six 

Nobel Peace Prize Laureates and 15 non-government organizations, including our 

own, released a letter from 134 Nobel Laureates calling for the immediate and unconditional release of the Lius. What is striking about the letter is not only the 

number of signatures, but also the diversity of its supporters. The letter, lead by 

Archbishop Desmond Tutu and Sir Richard Roberts was signed by Laureates from 

across all six Nobel disciplines, not just his fellow Peace Prize winners. Archbishop 

Tutu is also leading an effort to build a citizens’ movement in support of the Lius. 

Launched with a petition on Change.org that mirrors the Laureate letter, the initiative surpassed 200,000 signatures from 82 countries in less than 48 hours and continues to gather support. 

In light of this growing citizens’ movement, there are three ways that the United 

States can redouble its efforts and change its tactics in support of the Lius. As Representatives Frank Wolf (R–TX) and Jim McGovern (D–MA) of the Tom Lantos 

Human Rights Commission noted last Thursday during the launch of the Defending 

Freedoms Project, respect for human rights is a non-partisan issue and the United 

States has an essential role in speaking out against abuses. 

First, as a Nobel Peace Prize Laureate himself, President Obama has the unique 

opportunity to take a leading role in the growing citizens’ movement. Initiatives 

such as the Laureate letter organized Archbishop Tutu and Mr. Roberts provide Mr. 

Obama with a ready-made platform to highlight the continuing detention of the 

Lius. While the President did call for Dr. Liu’s release shortly after he was announced as the recipient of the 2010 Nobel Peace Prize, we are disappointed that 

since then he has not publicly reiterated this call nor has he ever personally called 

for Liu Xia’s release. The President’s voice in support of the Lius has the potential 

to galvanize the international community. However, without the President’s personal engagement on initiatives such as the Laureate letter, Beijing will receive the 

message that it can continue to detain Dr. Liu and Liu Xia in violation of international law without suffering any further public consequences. 

Second, the United States should consistently and publicly hold the Chinese government accountable for its continued refusal to release the Lius. While there is certainly a role for quiet diplomacy, the situation for Dr. Liu and Liu Xia has remained 
31 

largely unchanged over the last two years. Because the ultimate measure of success 

is their freedom, the anniversary of the Nobel award presents an opportune moment 

for the United States to reassess its approach. During the Cold War, many highlevel bilateral meetings, regardless of topic, began with the U.S. representative raising concerns about political prisoners. Reinstituting such tactics would send a clear 

message that the Chinese government’s refusal to comply with international law is 

unacceptable. 

Finally, the United States should take a leading role in multilateral efforts to support the Lius. For example, leadership on a letter from other G8 countries highlighting the continued detention of the world’s only imprisoned Nobel Peace Prize 

Laureate would remind the incoming Chinese leadership that if it wants to join the 

community of nations as a full partner, it must do more that merely talk about 

human rights and the rule of law. It is our belief that even a private discussion 

about such a public multilateral effort could have real and positive impacts on the 

ground. Especially in light of the recent news about Liu Xia’s plight, these kinds 

of international efforts are urgently needed. 

My testimony today has focused on a handful of cases. Admittedly, they are 

among the hardest cases in one of the most difficult countries. The challenge of such 

high profile cases is that they often lead to multiple, but ultimately uncoordinated, 

initiatives. With Archbishop Tutu’s efforts to develop an increasingly cohesive citizens’ movement, this anniversary presents an important opportunity to refocus attention on the continued detention of Dr. Liu Xiaobo and his wife Liu Xia. While 

relations between the United States and China are necessarily complex, respect for 

fundamental human rights must remain at the center of that relationship and the 

continued detention of the Lius is an important bellwether indicating that more 

must be done. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF YU JIE

DECEMBER 12, 2012

On October 9th, 2010, the day after Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace 

Prize, the Chinese Communist Party arranged a meeting between him and his wife 

Liu Xia. 

Liu told his wife that he had already learned of his award from prison officials. 

Then, facing her with tears in his eyes, he said, ‘‘this prize is for the lost souls of 

June Fourth.’’ 

Liu Xiaobo’s confinement made him only the second recipient, in more than a century of the prize’s history, to be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize while in prison. As 

Liu was unable to attend the ceremony held in Oslo, an empty chair was placed onstage to symbolize his absence: as you might expect, empty chairs are a rare sight 

at such ceremonies. 

Vaclav Havel, a fellow intellectual, dissident, and political prisoner who strongly 

supported Liu’s nomination for the Nobel Peace Prize, also shares with Liu a common casual fashion sense. Even after becoming President of the Czech Republic, 

Havel never abandoned his aversion to formal dress. He once refused a suit given 

to him by his friend Karel Schwarzenberger, a descendant of Austrian royalty, exclaiming ‘‘I can’t wear this! It would make me look like a clown.’’ Havel continued 

to wear a simple pullover and jeans throughout his presidency, riding his scooter 

through the winding halls of Prague Castle. 

Like Havel, Liu Xiaobo has always had a casual and simple style. You are not 

likely to see him in a suit and tie. Once when a friend invited him to dinner at an 

exclusive club, the host stopped Liu at the doorway and required him to change out 

of his jeans: he was less than happy with this formality. When Liu was a rising 

star in the academic world in the 1980s, he would often lecture at Beijing Normal 

University in worn old jeans and sandals. One classmate recalls that Liu, who always did things his own way even then, would often ‘‘wear a t-shirt, shorts, and 

sandals, with a tattered book bag on his back.’’ And whoever chose to criticize his 

sense of style would inevitably receive the self-satisfied response that ‘‘this entire 

outfit cost less than ten yuan!’’ 

If one day Liu Xiaobo regains his freedom, we can be certain that China will have 

already started on the path to democratization. Would he be invited to Oslo City 

Hall, to make up for the prize ceremony that he missed? Would he wear a neatly 

pressed black tuxedo to the ceremony?I can’t help but wonder how he would look, 

dressed so immaculately from head to toe. 

Every person’s life is filled with countless ‘‘ifs.’’ Liu Xiaobo’s is no exception. 
32 

If Liu Xiaobo’s father had not been a literature professor, if Liu had not been sent 

down to the countryside as an ‘‘educated youth,’’ or if he had not been accepted into 

the Chinese Department at Jilin University and joined the Innocent Hearts Poetry 

Group, amidst the unrivaled reign of the technical sciences in that era, would he 

have become just another bumbling engineer? 

If Liu Xiaobo had not been accepted into the Chinese Department at Beijing Normal University and remained as an instructor after graduation, if he had not published his declaration on the crisis of contemporary Chinese literature, and if he had 

not challenged Li Zehou, one of the more influential thinkers of that period, would 

he have become just another inconspicuous and obscure professor of aesthetics? 

If Liu Xiaobo, amidst the tumult of 1989, had only completed his term as a visiting scholar abroad rather than returning to Beijing like a moth to a flame, if he 

had only stood on the sidelines of the student movement rather than becoming one 

of the leaders of the hunger strike that marked its peak, or if he had just not stood 

ground with fellow protestors on Tiananmen Square until the very last moment, 

would he have avoided the tragedy of prison? 

If, as more and more Chinese dove into the sea of entrepreneurship in the 1990s, 

Liu Xiaobo had decided to change course and just focus on making some money, if 

he had returned to the ivory tower to refocus his energies on textual research, or 

if he had only dedicated some of his talent to publishing bestsellers, would he have 

become just another showy nouveau riche intellectual-turned-businessman? 

If, in this new century, Liu Xiaobo had not been elected to the presidency of the 

Independent Chinese PEN Center and dedicated himself to the struggle for freedom 

of expression, if he had not published millions of characters worth of political commentary in the overseas media and on overseas websites, and if he had not participated in drafting and organizing Charter ’08, would he have faced a fourth prison 

sentence? And would he have received the Nobel Peace Prize? 

Each of these ‘‘ifs’’ presents a crossroads in life. But if, over the past thirty years, 

China did not have Liu Xiaobo, or if Liu’s sense of duty . . . or shall we say the 

combination of his sense of duty, ambition, and other aspects of his complex personality . . . were not quite as strong as they have been, what would our world be like 

today? 

Liu Xiaobo’s existence, and Liu Xiaobo’s suffering, are a reminder to us all: we 

are not alone in this world, and cannot think only of ourselves. We have to remained 

engaged with and reflective upon the world around us, and bear our shared responsibility. 

In 1977, after years of work in the countryside as an ‘‘educated youth,’’ Liu Xiaobo 

was admitted into college, beginning his journey to becoming an independent intellectual at the age of twenty-two. Liu’s growth and activism over the three decades 

that followed can be divided into four main passages. 

The first passage, from 1977 to 1989, was a period in which Liu pursued his studies, began his career, and made a name for himself in literary circles. 

The late 1970s and 1980s were a rare moment of vitality and hope in modern 

China. Despite the occasional reemergence of political campaigns like the Anti-Spiritual Pollution Drive and the Campaign against Bourgeois Liberalization, the control and restraint of leaders like Hu Yaobang and Zhao Ziyang ensured that such 

temporary flashbacks to the Maoist era did not devastate the recently revitalized 

cultural and intellectual fields. The liberation of thought that characterized the 

1980s continued through the spring of 1989, when it was suddenly and cruelly extinguished. 

Liu Xiaobo benefited greatly from the open intellectual atmosphere of this period, 

while also becoming a central contributor to its continual expansion. Liu began his 

studies from literary criticism and aesthetics, gradually expanding into a far-reaching critique of Chinese traditional culture, Chinese intellectuals, and the prevailing 

political system. His books sold faster than they could be printed, and his speeches 

were all the talk of college campuses. 

In the spring of 1989, while Liu Xiaobo was a visiting scholar in the United 

States, student protests began in Beijing. Liu was determined to return, and soon 

dedicated himself wholeheartedly to this movement. Liu’s decision transformed him 

from the ‘‘dark horse’’ of literary circles to the ‘‘black hand’’ behind the student 

movement, from a detached intellectual to a man of action, and from a young scholar to an enemy of the state. The echo of gunfire reverberating through the streets 

of Beijing officially marked the end of Liu Xiaobo’s youth. 

The second passage, from 1989 to 1999, was a period in which Liu was imprisoned, persecuted, and remained committed and active while increasingly isolated 

This was a decade of unrelenting social and political stasis, combined with unprecedented economic growth. It was a decade of intellectual suppression and of the 

widespread abandonment of even the most basic of moral values. Deng Xiaoping’s 
33 

call to build a ‘‘well-off society’’ left the people of China with no choice but to accept 

the reality of being robbed of their freedom and denied their fundamental human 

rights, and to focus their energies upon the sole acceptable goal: making money. 

Money became the only thing in which people could truly believe. In academic circles, one after another, nationalism, populism, postmodernism, neo-traditionalism, 

and the ‘‘New Left’’ took intellectual circles by storm with the tacit approval and 

encouragement of the state. Liberalism, by contrast, was gradually marginalized. 

Liu Xiaobo’s human rights activism in this period led to his imprisonment three 

separate times, totaling nearly six years behind bars in one decade. And even when 

he was not in prison, Liu was still followed, closely monitored, and even placed 

under arbitrary house arrest by state security, making his life anything but easy. 

Yet he refused to give up, to be discouraged, or to even feel a hint of anxiety about 

his increasingly marginalized position within Chinese society. Instead, he continued 

on his course, reading the latest commentaries, observing the social and cultural developments around him, collaborating with similarly minded colleagues, and searching for new possibilities. 

Throughout this decade, Liu composed and organized signatories to a number of 

open letters addressing such pressing issues as implementing democracy, protecting 

human rights, and overturning the official verdict on Tiananmen. Despite these farreaching efforts, Liu’s influence continued to be limited primarily to a small circle 

of dissident intellectuals: he had become a lonely trailblazer. 

The third passage, from 1999 to 2008, was a period in which Liu wrote extensively on political affairs, and emerged as one of contemporary China’s central public intellectuals and human rights activists. 

This was a decade in which China’s economic development continued to accelerate, while political reform continued to lag far behind. Corruption continued to 

plague society, and social tensions continued to intensify. Throughout the reigns of 

Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao, the Chinese Communist Party has declared to the outside world the rise of a new great power, and attempted to export the so-called 

China model. Yet domestically, the Party has proselytized its ‘‘harmonious society:’’ 

beneath its pleasant sounding veneer, such harmony is in reality nothing but the 

maintenance of ‘‘stability’’ through unrelenting violence, with the growing ranks of 

secret police running wild with increasingly free reign. 

Yet from another perspective, in this decade civil society gradually took root and 

slowly expanded, NGOs sprung up one after another, and rapidly expanding Internet use resulted in unprecedented access to free information. However, divisions 

continued to grow within the intellectual world, as more and more scholars began 

to willingly abandon their independence and stand wholeheartedly with the government. 

Totalitarianism with Chinese characteristics has undergone repeated metamorphoses on its path to modernity. The majority has chosen to bow down and submit 

to this superficially benevolent yet actually quite coldblooded force; they justify their 

decision by repeating, ‘‘if you can’t beat them, join them.’’ And as one sector after 

another gave up and joined in this game, cynicism has come to reign over Chinese 

society, erasing any remaining momentum for further reform. 

In this era, Liu Xiaobo continued to be closely monitored by the state security 

forces. However, with the exception of brief periods of house arrest and interrogation at particular ‘‘sensitive times’’ each year, he managed to stay out of prison, allowing for a relative sense of security and stability. Combining his extensive knowledge with a growing awareness of the essential role of public intellectuals in social 

transformation, Liu maintained a sharp awareness of pressing issues and a passion 

for critical reflection. As one scholar has noted, ‘‘he never stopped thinking through 

a workable program for political transition, as well as possible directions to pursue 

following such a transition. His thought provides a unique and extremely valuable 

perspective that links the intellectual world with grassroots society, in search of a 

soft landing in a ‘post-transition’ era yet to come.’’ 

Between 2003 and 2007, Liu Xiaobo also served two terms as the president of the 

Independent Chinese PEN Center, finally developing on-the-ground infrastructure 

for the center’s activities within China. Cooperating with and drawing support from 

his colleagues, Liu overcame the authorities’ restrictions on independent organizations, making Chinese PEN an unprecedentedly vibrant independent organization 

dedicated to protecting freedom of expression and promoting the development of 

Chinese literature. In 2008, Liu Xiaobo retired from his post in Chinese PEN and 

dedicated himself wholeheartedly to drafting, revising, and organizing signatories to 

Charter ’08 work which lasted until his arrest on December 8th of that year. The 

dual leadership roles that Liu assumed in this decade, both in Independent Chinese 

PEN and in the preparation of Charter ’08, unveiled his new identity as a civil society organizer and coordinator. 
34 

The fourth passage in Liu Xiaobo’s life began in 2009, and continues to this day. 

From the moment that policemen abruptly stormed into his home in the middle 

of night on December 8th, 2008, Liu Xiaobo lost his freedom. One year later, in December of 2009, he was sentenced to a total of eleven years in prison. But then, one 

more year later, Liu Xiaobo was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. 

Although the Chinese authorities have imprisoned Liu Xiaobo’s body, they cannot 

imprison his name and his ideas. Liu’s experience unmasks the fundamentally dictatorial nature of the Chinese Communist regime for the world to see. And no matter what disguises the Party may try, so long as Liu remains locked away in prison, 

there is no way for this regime to hide its despicable nature. 

Now, the honor of the Nobel Peace Prize has elevated Liu Xiaobo to a new status. 

Although Liu’s contributions cannot be measured solely through this prize, this 

honor nevertheless places him directly at the heart of any future sociopolitical transition in China. Chen Jun, a good friend of Liu, notes, ‘‘I strongly believe that 

Xiaobo has his own expectations and even preparations in this regard. If he can persist, and continue on the path that he has followed over the years, he will become 

an outstanding figure in history, like Vaclav Havel, leaving a deep and lasting imprint upon China. This imprint could be far more significant than simply realizing 

democratization in China. And I strongly believe that he is qualified to play such 

a role.’’ In the not so distant future, will Liu Xiaobo finally realize the Herculean 

task of bringing real social transformation to China? 

As for what this new passage in Liu’s life might bring, we all have yet to see. 

But each one of us who cares about China’s future and its fate is eagerly waiting, 

and imagining what is still to come. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF LIU MIN

DECEMBER 12, 2012

My husband Yu Jie and I met Liu Xiaobo and his wife in 1999. Shortly after we 

became very close friends. 

Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia began their romantic relationship in the early 1990s. 

After the Tiananmen Square Massacre in 1989, Liu Xiaobo was imprisoned for the 

first time, resulting in the breakup of his first marriage. After his release, Liu 

Xiaobo and Liu Xia fell deeply in love. During this time, Liu Xiaobo was imprisoned 

for a second, and then a third time. In the period when Liu Xiaobo was sent to 

Dalian to be re-educated through labor, Liu Xia went to see him every month from 

Beijing, traveling back and forth 38 times over three years. The trip between Beijing 

and Dalian was 1,250 miles. 

Then, after fighting for it time and again, they had a wedding in prison. Afterward Liu Xia told me their only celebration was a simple lunch: the labor camp cafeteria made a couple of dishes for them. In these three years, it was the only time 

they had eaten at the same table. 

The pressure faced by Liu Xia was even greater than that on Liu Xiaobo. She was 

originally a poet, painter and photographer who kept her distance from politics. 

Simply by being Liu Xiaobo’s wife, she was included on the list of ‘‘enemies of the 

state.’’ Permanently unable to live a normal person’s life, she developed eye problems, endocrine disorders, insomnia, nervous breakdowns, skin illnesses, and severe 

depression. She had to take large doses of sleeping pills to fall asleep every night. 

After Liu Xiaobo was arrested, a friend asked her about how she was sleeping. She 

said, now that Liu Xiaobo is gone, I can actually sleep more peacefully. ‘‘A shoe had 

fallen down from the ceiling long ago. For many years, I was like the person waiting 

for the other shoe to drop. Now, the shoe has finally dropped, and I can finally feel 

at peace.’’ 

Liu Xia and Liu Xiaobo have been married for many years, and they have never 

had children. Liu Xia said, ‘‘A long time ago, we agreed not to have children. Having 

a father in prison in any case is a cruel thing to a boy or a girl. So, we are still 

a DINK family.’’ 

In December 2008 Liu Xiaobo was arrested; on Christmas, 2009, Liu Xiaobo was 

sentenced to 11 years in prison, and was later sent to the prison in Jinzhou, 

Liaoning, to serve his term. If Liu Xiaobo is to serve his term in full, Liu Xia will 

have traveled back and forth between Beijing and Jinzhou more than a hundred 

times. The trip between Beijing and Jinzhou is approximately 600 miles. In total, 

her trek will have been more than 8,000 miles! 

Liu Xia also told me about the severe winters in Jinzhou, and because of the lack 

of heating in prison, Liu Xiaobo felt very cold and asked Liu Xia to bring him some 

thick wool pants. In September 2010, after visiting the prison Liu Xia returned to 
35 

Beijing and asked me to buy wool pants for her, so she could bring them the next 

time she visited. 

To our surprise, on October 8, 2010, the news of Liu Xiaobo receiving the Nobel 

Peace Prize broke. The night before, I even went out eating and shopping with Liu 

Xia, and picked out a piece of clothing for her. She said it was too expensive. I said, 

if Xiaobo wins, you have to go and accept the award on his behalf, and you don’t 

even have any formalwear. So she finally bought it. Yet, she lost her freedom shortly after, and could not go to Oslo to accept the award on her husband’s behalf. 

Just five days after news of Liu Xiaobo receiving the Nobel Prize became public, 

my husband Yu Jie finished a lecture at the University of Southern California and 

hurried back to Beijing because he wanted to finish Liu Xiaobo’s biography. As soon 

as Yu Jie arrived in Beijing, he was immediately placed under house arrest by the 

secret police. 

The first week in the beginning, I could still go to work freely. I had bought the 

wool pants for Liu Xiaobo, but I could not get in contact with Liu Xia, and so I got 

in touch with Liu Xia’s younger brother and brought the pants to him. Subsequently, when Liu Xia’s brother came out from visiting her, he was searched by the 

police, who found on him a note written by Liu Xia with my name and telephone 

number on it. And so, that day, as soon as I came home from work, I was immediately placed under house arrest. Since then, my husband and I had been under 

house arrest, until mid-December. On December 9 Yu Jie was kidnapped by the police from home to the outskirts of town, and was beaten and tortured, and almost 

died. Soon after I lost my job as well. 

In January 2012, our family of three finally escaped China, and came to America. 

Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia’s predicaments weigh on our minds constantly, especially 

Liu Xia’s being under house arrest and isolated from the world for over two years. 

We worry about her physical and mental state. In my own personal experience, 

when my husband and I were put under house arrest for two months, we were together, but a life where all our means of contact were cut off, where we could not 

take one step out of our own door, where we could not see a single other person 

on the outside, drove us nearly insane. And Liu Xia is alone, under arrest for more 

than two years! That kind of suffering is unbearable. I hope the American government, especially President Obama, who is also a Nobel Peace Prize recipient, can 

personally and directly put out a strong call to the Chinese government, and demand that they release Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia immediately. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHRISTOPHER SMITH, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW

JERSEY; CHAIRMAN, CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA

DECEMBER 12, 2012

Two years after the independent Nobel Committee awarded the Nobel Peace Prize 

to Chinese intellectual and democracy advocate Liu Xiaobo, little has changed. Liu 

Xiaobo remains isolated in prison. He remains thousands of miles away from his 

wife, Liu Xia, whom authorities have now held under house arrest for 26 months. 

Chinese authorities continue to defend their imprisonment of Liu Xiaobo and continue to deny Liu Xia’s de facto house arrest. Despite global calls to release the 

Nobel Peace Prize laureate and his wife, Chinese authorities remain resolute in 

their will to silence them. 

It has now been a year since we last convened a hearing to discuss this outrageous and senseless violation of the Lius’ rights—a year later, we ask the same 

questions and express the same concerns. 

Liu Xiaobo’s ordeal is well-known. In December 2010, The Nobel Committee 

awarded the Nobel Peace Prize to Liu Xiaobo ‘‘for his long and non-violent struggle 

for fundamental human rights in China.’’ A year earlier, Chinese authorities sentenced him to 11 years in prison for ‘‘inciting subversion of state power,’’ the longest 

known sentence for that crime, simply because he exercised his internationally recognized right to free expression. Liu’s conviction, according to court documents, was 

based on Charter 08 and six essays he wrote. Mr. Liu’s trial, conviction, and sentence, once again demonstrated the Chinese government’s failure to uphold its international human rights obligations and its failure to abide by procedural norms and 

safeguards that meet international standards. 

Liu Xiaobo co-wrote and signed Charter 08—a treatise urging political and legal 

reforms based on constitutional principles. Charter 08 states that freedom, equality, 

and human rights are universal values of humankind and that democracy and constitutional government are the fundamental framework for protecting these values. 

In response to this public call for rights and reform, officials blocked access to and 
36 

censored all mentions of Charter 08. They questioned, summoned, or otherwise harassed hundreds of Chinese citizens for contributing to or signing the document. 

Today, we have little news about Liu’s current condition. Liu remains in prison— 

there is little doubt that the Chinese continue to treat him unmercifully. 

We do, sadly, have some news. While we previously knew that authorities continued to hold Liu’s wife under a de facto form of house arrest—with little contact with 

the outside world—we have recently learned more about her unbearable circumstances and detention. Last week, two Associated Press journalists were able to 

briefly interview Liu Xia, while the guards that keep watch over her were away for 

a midday break. Upon opening the door, the journalists found a woman shocked by 

the rare opportunity to communicate with those outside her prison. 

She wept as she decried the injustice and absurdity of her detention. She told 

them of her poor health and of the outrageous abuses she has suffered. Her ongoing 

plight has been referred to by some as the ‘‘most severe retaliation by a government 

given to a Nobel winner’s family.’’ 

Liu Xia remains detained in violation of Chinese law—a victim of the government’s contempt and paranoia. Angered by Liu’s award and his global support, Chinese authorities have unjustly detained this innocent woman. 

The targeting of wives and children, of grandparents and associates, however, remains a common practice for the Chinese government. A few weeks ago, the nephew 

of Chen Guangcheng, the blind activist who escaped to the United States earlier 

this year, was sentenced to 39 months imprisonment after defending himself from 

thugs who attacked his family. As with Liu’s case, the trial was marred by procedural irregularities and violations. In recent months, the wife and child of Mongolian activist Hada have been confined to their home illegally and blocked from communicating with others. Today, we will hear moving, first-hand accounts of how 

families suffer when courageous individuals speak out against the Chinese government. 

This, of course, is not a new tactic by Chinese authorities. In recent years we have 

heard how Chinese officials and those operating under their authority have interrogated children or harassed acquaintances. Chinese guards have shouted expletives 

at school-age sons and daughters and enforced economic reprisals against relatives 

and loved ones. 

Liu Xia is not alone—but, she remains a symbol of these often overlooked collateral victims. 

Why target family members and friends? The Chinese government fears the free 

thinkers they love and support. It acts in ways to silence those free thinkers who 

promote the best ideals and seek the greatest good for China. In China, free thinkers represent a threat to the government’s ‘‘stability’’—while representing new hopes 

for the Chinese people. 

This threat of reform is China’s greatest concern. Recently, after the sentencing 

of Chinese official Bo Xilai’s wife for intentional homicide, leading human rights and 

China experts suggested that she might receive a medical pardon after nine years. 

Nine years for murder—as compared to eleven for Liu Xiaobo’s calls for freedom. 

This is the China we are dealing with—one in which pre-meditated murder is 

viewed with less concern than calls for non-violent political reform. A China in 

which Chinese officials are sentenced to reclusive, plush prisons, while the wives 

and children and parents of rights advocates are doomed to a Kafkaesque existence—languishing in domestic prisons without opportunities for appeals or pardons. 

A year after our last hearing on the subject, little has changed. Mr. Liu remains 

in prison and Mrs. Liu under an extralegal form of house arrest. Our resolve, however, has changed—in fact, it has grown stronger. Today, we are more concerned 

about the current conditions for Liu Xiaobo and Liu Xia. And, we are more outraged 

at the lack of humanity demonstrated by those perpetrating these crimes—from the 

thugs guarding Liu Xia’s door to the newly-appointed leadership in Beijing. Today, 

our resolve—and the resolve of free-minded people—is, without question, stronger. 

A year ago, we called on China to immediately and unconditionally release Liu 

Xiaobo and Liu. Today, we similarly demand that China end this ‘‘absurdity’’ for 

these noble citizens—and for all who remain detained in China for their political 

beliefs. We have not forgotten Liu Xiaobo and his wife. We commit to seeking their 

release from confinement and detention. We will not forget them next year, or the 

year thereafter—regardless of the circumstances. We will continue to demand they 

be freed and continue to demand that all Chinese citizens enjoy the fundamental 

freedoms protected under international law. 

It is with this resolve and concern that we are joined today by a panel of experts 

on these cases and on China more broadly. I would like to thank them for their advocacy on behalf of Mr. Liu and Mrs. Liu and for sharing their insights into recent 

developments here today. 
37 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. SHERROD BROWN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM OHIO; 

COCHAIRMAN, CONGRESSIONAL-EXECUTIVE COMMISSION ON CHINA

DECEMBER 12, 2012

Good morning. I want to thank Chris Smith for hosting this hearing on the ongoing detentions of two human rights advocates. We stand united behind this cause. 

We stand with our government, governments around the world, and the 134 Nobel 

laureates led by Archbishop Desmond Tutu, to urge incoming Chinese President Xi 

Jinping to immediately and unconditionally release Liu Xiaobo and his wife Liu Xia. 

Let me be clear, there is no question that China has made progress on many 

fronts. 

But we know that the Chinese people are not satisfied with economic progress in 

the absence of justice. We know that Chinese citizens—like women and men around 

the world—want and deserve basic human rights. 

They deserve freedom and justice and equality of opportunity. They deserve to 

voice their opinions without fear of oppression. 

That’s why we’re here today. 

For decades, Liu Xiaobo has been one of the most passionate and thoughtful advocates for freedom, justice, and human rights in China. 

He was a leader during the 1989 Tiananmen democracy protests. He has written 

nearly 800 essays advocating human rights and peaceful reform. He was one of the 

co-authors of Charter 08, a document released in 2008 calling for an end to authoritarian rule and respect for human rights. 

For this, Liu has been censored. 

He has endured three years in a labor camp. And, now, he is serving the fourth 

year of an 11-year prison sentence. 

That’s why, when the Nobel Committee awarded Liu the Peace Prize in 2010, 

they noted his ‘‘long and non-violent struggle for fundamental human rights in 

China.’’ 

They understood, just as many in China and around the world understand, that 

freedom and human rights are not freely given. 

It takes courage and commitment. It takes people like Liu who are willing to sacrifice for their neighbors, families, fellow citizens—and the next generation. 

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. popularized this struggle as a fierce commitment to 

building the ‘‘beloved community’’. 

Indeed, Liu follows in the tradition of Peace Prize winners, like Dr. King, who 

have labored to build a better world, brick by brick. 

In 1991, the Nobel committee awarded the prize to Aung San Suu Kyi for her 

democratic opposition to a brutal regime. 

All of these activists have fought oppression with a message of non-violence, an 

unwillingness to give up, and love. 

Liu spoke about the efficacy of nonviolence in 2006 when he wrote that ‘‘the greatness of non-violent resistance is that even as man is faced with forceful tyranny . . . 

the victim responds to hate with love . . . and to violence with reason.’’ 

Each day China denies citizens, like Liu, basic freedoms; China loses out on the 

diversity of opinions that lead to better government policies and a more just society. 

Imprisoning Liu Xiaobo is not the act of a nation serious about earning a place 

of respect at the global table. 

It is an act of an authoritarian state afraid of the strength of its own people. 

Aung San Suu Kyi was finally able to give her Nobel acceptance speech in June 

of this year, more than two decades after she was awarded the prize. During her 

speech she said everyone is capable of contributing to peace. 

Liu Xiaobo exemplifies the courage needed to cultivate justice. 

We urge China to release the Liu family. Liu Xiaobo shouldn’t have to wait two 

decades to give his own acceptance speech. 

We look forward to that day. Thank you and I look forward to the testimony of 

our esteemed witnesses. 

Æ