« AnteriorContinuar »
Mr. Lantos. Did he have any official contacts with government people on the mainland?
Mrs. LIU. Yes and no. I don't know what kind of contacts, because when he first went back to China in 1975, at that time China was not quite open yet, so whoever goes there they have an escort
So since then the same people accompany him every time he would go back there.
Mr. LANTOS. But apart from the tourist escorts, did he have dealings to the best of your knowledge with higher ranking government officials?
Mrs. Liv. Actually, not higher ranking. They may talk to him. He requested interviews, yes,
with some government officials there. Mr. LANTOS. Did I understand you to say, Mrs. Liu, that he published a book in mainland China?
Mrs. Liu. Yes. It was last November, actually, after his death they speeded up the procedures and put that book out right away, the same book, this one here, “Biography of Chiang Ching-kuo.
Mr. LANTOS. My final question, if I may, Mr. Chairman, relates to one of your earlier observations.
In response to a question you said your husband did not seem to be afraid, just prior to his murder, that he seemed to have no fear that something like this would happen, is that correct?
Mrs. Liv. Yes. He had no fear at all, and he never thought this would happen here. He often told his friends that same story. Some of his friends continually warned him to be careful but he always
Mr. Lantos. I understand. Let me try to reconcile two of your statements. On the one hand, you say that during the last phase of his life he was not afraid that anything would happen to him, because he was here in the United States.
Mrs. Liu. Yes.
Mr. LANTOS. And he knew that no harm could come to him on American soil?
Mrs. Liu. That is right.
Mr. LANTOS. On the other hand, you indicated he was afraid to return to Taiwan for a period of 10 years, because he was afraid that were he to return to Taiwan, something might happen to him.
Mrs. Liu. That is correct, too, because he doesn't have the confidence of the Taiwan Government. He knew too many stories about people being locked up and put away because of talking, their viewpoint.
Mr. LANTOS. What would you say to an interpretation of this tragic event which would run something like this. He clearly had reason to be concerned about the attitude of Taiwan authorities toward him, but he also knew Taiwan authorities to be both knowledgeable of the United States and very intelligent, and, therefore, certainly unprepared to order an assassination of an American citizen on American soil.
Would that have been his view? That is why he was not afraid? Mrs. Liv. I think so.
Mr. LANTOS. Therefore, one would be led to the conclusion that to whatever extent there was governmental complicity, it was not at the highest levels, because people at the highest levels in the view of your husband would not have done something like that. Would this be a reasonable conclusion?
Mrs. LIU. That we don't know.
Mr. LANTOS. We don't know. None of us does, Mrs. Liu, and I think it is very important we try to pursue this line of reasoning, because I think we are now coming to the hub of the issue, and we are deeply grateful to you for your candor. I am putting two things together here.
I am putting together your statement that for 16 years your husband was afraid to go to Taiwan because he thought something could happen to him. That is your testimony.
Mrs. LIU. Yes.
Mr. LANTOS. It is also your testimony that prior to this outrageous act of murder, your husband was really not afraid in Daly City, because he knew such a thing would not happen in the United States. Mrs. LIU. That is true.
Mr. LANTOS. If both of these things are true, your husband must have thought that whoever wanted to do him in would not perpetrate such an act on American soil.
Mrs. Liu. Your theory is right. Henry lived in the United States for 17 years and he took too many things in this country for grant
Mr. LANTOS. If I may be allowed to ask the final question I have, Mr. Chairman, because I think we are getting close to the hub of this issue, your husband clearly was a nuisance, an irritant, an embarrassment to the government in Taiwan because he was writing unkind things of the leadership; is that true?
Mrs. Liv. Yes.
Mr. LANTOS. But what happened, and the consequences of what happened, is much more unpleasant than any publication of your husband, isn't that true?
Mrs. LIU. Yes. Mr. LANTOS. Therefore, one may be reasonably led to the conclusion that the people at the top are as appalled and unhappy at what happened than presumably the rest of us, be brought upon them the worst of all possible consequences, a congressional hearing with possible negative repercussions in the future. Would you agree with my analysis?
Mrs. Liu. I really don't know, because the case hasn't been completely solved yet. We don't know who gave the orders.
Mr. LANTOS. None of us does. We are speculating. Mrs. Liu. Yes, of course, and maybe the whole Government is involved. They have their critical moment there, they try to solve the problem over there, or some kind of power struggle over there. That could have happened, a decision like this.
Mr. LANTOS. Mrs. Liu, let me just say that as your Congressman, I will do my utmost, as I am sure most of my colleagues will, to see to it that the perpetrators of this outrage are brought back to California to stand trial in an American court of law. Mrs. LIU. Thank you.
Mr. LANTOS. Thank you. Mr. SOLARZ. Mr. Torricelli. Mr. TORRICELLI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, I know that the hour is late and the members have to leave, so I will be brief.
Mrs. Liu, I would suppose that one of the real answers to Mr. Lantos' question is that your husband believed that he would be safe here, because those who would do him ill would respect American laws, would not try to commit this murder on our soil, and the fact is your husband was mistaken in accounting for his enemies.
They were more vicious than one might have imagined, and certainly did not respect the laws of our country, as he believed. Isn't that perhaps the real answer for this inconsistency return to Taiwan, with the belief in safety in America? Mrs. Liv. I think so, yes.
Mr. TORRICELLI. I also wanted to add that in listening to Mr. Lantos' remarks, that in fact there is an explanation for the fact that those who might be in leadership in Taiwan now have brought about worse publicity than one might have, I imagine, and the possible explanation for their expectations of how, whether it be an organized crime figure, whoever it might be in Taiwan, the expectations for publicity, and the reality of this hearing, and the cost that this has brought to those murderers, the difference in those expectations is you, your own courage in coming here and in speaking out, and in complicating the plans of those who might have brought about his crime, and on that I would add my congratulations and my respect, as others have.
Mrs. Liu. Thank you.
Mr. TORRICELLI. I only wanted to conclude with two brief questions. Knowing of your own family's finances and incomes, was your husband ever compensated for any of his writings by a foreign government? Mrs. Liu. No.
Mr. TORRICELLI. What has been the principal means of support for your family in the last several years?
Mrs. Liu. Well, we have been working since we got to this country, and we have our own business to support our living.
Mr. TORRICELLI. And that business has been the sole means of support of your family?
Mrs. LIU. Yes.
Mr. TORRICELLI. During the investigation of the murder, did any of the law enforcement officials ask to see financial or tax records of your family?
Mrs. Liu. No.
Mr. TORRICELLI. So the answer is no, no one has looked into the family's finances?
Mrs. Liu. Yes. Mr. TORRICELLI. I have no further questions, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
Mr. SOLARZ. Thank you, Mr. Torricelli.
Mrs. Liu, I think all of us have been deeply moved and touched by your testimony this afternoon. If the American writer, Ernest Hemingway, was right when he defined courage as grace under pressure, you are a very courageous woman indeed.
Mrs. Liu. Thank you.
Mr. SOLARZ. We are deeply grateful to you for your willingness to come and share this willingness with us at this time.
Mr. DYMALLY. Mr. Chairman, I want to join you and the members of the committee in expressing my deep sympathy to Mrs. Liu, and to commend her for her courage in coming here today. Mrs. Liu. Thank you very much.
SUBCOMMITTEE BUSINESS Mr. SOLARZ. Before we hear from Mr. Glennon, while the other members are still here, are there any comments on the proposed agenda for the subcommittee that anyone would like to make at this time?
I am very pleased to see that item No. 4 is on your agenda. This is a matter that needs to be fully considered. I have great reservations about the direction of the U.S. Government with respect to this territory and I would hope that we can allow a substantial period of time and staff direction to background information on this subject because I do not consider it a matter to be pushed lightly, as is the apparent intention by some people downtown.
Mr. SOLARZ. You are talking about the hearings on lessons of Vietnam?
Mr. BEREUTER. I am talking about Micronesia No. 4.
Mr. SOLARZ. There are two 4’s. That is a misprint. ! Let me say to my friends that I had discussion over this with the chairman the other day who would like our subcommittee to handle this, and I told him that we would be prepared to do so but only if the administration was prepared to cooperate in making logistical support available for us to actually go out to Micronesia so we could see for ourselves exactly what the conditions are like. And I think the gentleman has already gone, but many of the rest of us haven't yet, and I am prepared to take this up with the chairman. I think the committee is obligated to deal with this.
The only question is whether it should be dealt with initially in our subcommittee or by the full committee and I just feel very strongly that before we undertake that responsibility, we sh have an opportunity to get out there. And we were going to do this in December. The gentleman may know, unfortunately, we weren't able to get the cooperation we were seeking from the administration. • Mr. BEREUTER. I would lend any support to your effort to have it
considered, and the subcommittee, because I intend to give this exhaustive attention and that is the kind of procedure that ought to take place at the subcommittee level.
Mr. SOLARZ. Would the gentleman be interested in joining a study mission to Micronesia if we undertake it in a subcommittee?
Mr. BEREUTER. I will consider the possibility if you will guarantee me safe conduct.
Mr. SOLARZ. I refer you to Mr. Solomon for that.
here are two other areas of interest. One is the refugee problems that we have in the entire area of our jurisdiction, and I would hope that we might also be able to concentrate on that.
Second, as you may know, I am the new ranking member on the Human Rights and International Organizations Subcommittee, and if you recall, Mr. Chairman, you promised me last year that we would hold hearings on human rights violations in mainland China I think this is a good time today to mention that. From some of the reports that I have seen, from Amnesty International and some others, there is an atrocious situation there.
While we are at it, Mr. Chairman, I am going to ask unanimous consent to submit for the record the written testimony of a Mr. A. James Gregor. He is a professor, as you know, of political science and principal investigator of the Pacific Basin Project, Institute of International Studies, at the University of California in Berkeley.
Let me cite one thing and I will yield back.
In his report he not only talks about the improving human rights situation and political situation in Taiwan, which seems to go counter to some of what we have heard today, he also cites on page 7, which will become part of the record, the most recent cases of gross interference with the activities of Chinese in the United States. We are talking about the People's Republic of China now and two individuals. He cites their names and goes on to say that one of the gentlemen disappeared in July 1984, here in this country, after having sought political asylum from the U.S. Immigration authorities in April.
He cites another individual who committed suicide in the PRC's New York Consulate only 3 days after he had asked for political asylum. These two incidents are similar to what we are investigating today, and we ought to look into such incidents concerning other countries besides Taiwan. I would ask that this written testimony be submitted for the record.
Mr. SOLARZ. Without objection, the testimony submitted by Mr. Gregor will be included in the record. 1
Let me say to the gentleman that we are prepared to have hearings on the situation in China as we will subsequently on the situation, general situation in Taiwan.
Today's hearing was fundamentally on the Henry Liu matter and we will be prepared to work with the gentleman from New York in terms of seeing if we can develop a consensus concerning any resolutions that might emerge from the committee concerning both Taiwan and the People's Republic of China.
Mr. SOLOMON. I look forward to that, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. SOLARZ. Before we adjourn, I thank the gentleman for his comments, we do have one last witness, Mr. Glennon.
STATEMENT OF MICHAEL J. GLENNON, PROFESSOR OF LAW,
UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI Mr. GLENNON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Let me say I appreciate the lateness of the hour and I will try to be brief.
1 See appendix 1.