Hu Na Incident
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Hu Na incident (traditional and simplified Chinese: 胡娜事件) was the first major test of diplomatic relations between the United States and the People's Republic of China. Diplomatic relations between the two countries had been established in 1979. Hu Na (traditional and simplified Chinese: 胡娜) was a young and rising tennis star from China's Sichuan province. In 1982, while touring California with a Chinese government-sponsored tennis team, she fled her hotel room and sought refuge in the home of friends. She requested political asylum, stating that she feared the Chinese government would compel her to join the Communist Party of China against her will under threat of persecution. After months of wrangling, America granted her asylum in 1983. The reaction from the Chinese government was swift and furious.
[edit] Hu Na's Life
Hu Na had a talent for sports from a very early age, and spent several hours practicing every day. Noting her talent, her father was able to enroll her in a special athletic school. She took a special interest in tennis, going on to win first the Sichuan provincial level competition, then the national level young tennis tournament, making her China's top ranked tennis player. At this point, she was invited to join the China National women's tennis team, based in Beijing.
In July 1982, the team, including Hu Na, came to America to participate in a tennis match. On her second day in America, she was nowhere to be found in her hotel room. Several days later, American newspapers widely reported that she had sought political asylum.
After receiving asylum, Hu Na continued to play tennis. Later, she resettled in Taiwan.
[edit] Reactions of Chinese and American Governments to asylum request
The United States government allowed her to remain in America while it considered her request. It delayed nearly eight months in making a decision. On the one hand, Hu Na had considerable sympathy from President Reagan's administration and from the American public. On the other hand, American diplomats knew that to grant Hu Na asylum would almost certainly anger the Chinese regime and harm bilateral relations, and feared that China might even seek stronger relations with the Soviet Union as a result. The Chinese government, meanwhile, asserted that it would not persecute Hu Na [1] and floated vague assertions that she was being compelled to stay in America. The Chinese demanded her immediate return to China. The US Department of State finally issued a memo supporting her asylum claim to the Department of Justice, which had the ultimate responsibility to make a decision. On April 5th, 1983, the United States granted Hu Na political asylum.
The Chinese government immediately displayed its anger. It first denounced the asylum claim by diplomatic note, claiming the US was interfering in its domestic affairs. Then, the Chinese announced they would sever all cultural and artistic ties between the two countries. A Voice of America radio broadcasting delegation visit to China, scheduled to take place just a few days later, was cancelled. American diplomats in Beijing found themselves cut off from invitations and contacts with the Chinese government.
While the asylum incident's aftershocks were at first severe, the incident did not impact long-term Sino-American relations. Hu Na herself was likely of little concern to the Chinese, however, the incident resulted in a loss of "face" for the Chinese government and brought to light other bilateral points of contention. One contemporary article [2] stated that the Chinese, through diplomatic channels, suggested that they would not strongly object if Hu Na was granted some type of immigration status other than 'political asylym'.
Ultimately, the incident did not result in long-term damage to Sino-American relations. Looking back, it was a clear win for American foreign policy. [3] The United States showed it was willing to reject unreasonable Chinese demands even while seeking improved relations. China, meanwhile, learned that even high level diplomatic maneuvers would be unlikely to change a US policy with popular support across American society.
[edit] References
|
|||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
