Inside Communist China’s War on Religion: Marco Respinti

[RUSH TRANSCRIPT BELOW] There are few people who have played a more important role in broadly supporting the rights of religious believers in China than Marco Respinti, director-in-charge of the Bitter Winter magazine.

“In the first six to eight months of our existence online as a magazine, some 40 people who were connected to us on the ground were arrested in China. … Half of them simply disappeared,” Respinti says.

During the International Religious Freedom Summit in Washington, I had the great pleasure of finally sitting down with Respinti to discuss how the Chinese Communist Party systematically infiltrates, coopts, and destroys religious movements in China.

Views expressed in this video are opinions of the host and the guest, and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Epoch Times.

RUSH TRANSCRIPT

Jan Jekielek:
Marco Respinti, such a pleasure to have you on American Thought Leaders.

Marco Respinti:
My pleasure.

Mr. Jekielek:
Marco, I’ve had this deep respect for you for quite a long time through your work exposing human rights violations in China, and especially those of religious minorities. I believe that freedom of belief is probably the most fundamental right that exists. What do you think?

Mr. Respinti:
I think that the most fundamental right for a human being, for a person, is the right to life, because otherwise, if you’re dead, no rights. In my opinion, this is the first. The second, but it’s direct, the relationship, is the freedom of conscience or religious freedom because they’re strictly connected, one is inside the other, because it’s all about addressing the most fundamental question of all in human life. Does God, a supreme being, a universal force, does that God exist or not?

And if it exists or not, this has a direct relationship on how you organize your life as an individual and as a member of the community you live in, starting from your family and going to all the intermediate structures between individual and state that the human genius can imagine. So again, it’s truly the second most important question of all. Freedom of religion is not liberty if you have to believe privately in a closet, in your room, and to pray secretly.

But fundamentally, it’s also the liberty to live according to your belief. It’s public. It’s political in the sense of the Greek name of polis, the res publica, the public thing. It’s not by chance that America put this freedom as the first right of the American citizens in the First Amendment to the Constitution. It was here to a long tradition of thought which put this idea of the human being being fundamentally shaped by his or her thought about God, that tradition is the core question out of which America was born. That fundamental idea in America is still going around and it confronts all the liberty killing regimes, government, and historical experience of many other
countries.

Mr. Jekielek:
I’ve come to understand that essentially every liberal democracy out there right now really took its inspiration from the U.S. ultimately. Do you view it that way?

Mr. Respinti:
I think it is correct to say that because of its importance, America is a lighthouse for many democratic regimes. Many liberal democracies try to imitate America, but not all of them are American. They don’t understand the natural Aristotelian roots out of which this country was born. For sure, all the liberal democracies that try to imitate America via Enlightenment and the Jacobin, French Revolution heritage in their bones will have a hard time to understand this country and imitate it for the best.

Mr. Jekielek:
Why?

Mr. Respinti:
Because the two things are completely different and cannot cope with each other. The American experience is born out of this Aristotelian, Christian natural law based tradition. The Jacobin Revolution and the Enlightenment in the French version is the idea of getting rid of that past, instead of evaluating it and correcting the mistakes. Nothing is perfect when it’s human.

The Enlightenment project, as it has been called by scholars, is the idea of getting totally rid of that past, because it was judged as negative and amounting to nothing. As a matter of fact, all the tyranny and totalitarian regimes that came after the French Revolution were inspired by that. Instead, democracies that are inspired by America have a different quality in the public life that they grant to their citizens.

Mr. Jekielek:
Why this particular interest in China and their lack of religious freedom?

Mr. Respinti:
People say that after the end of the Cold War, communism is over. It is not. We have 1.3 billion people in China, the most populated country in the world who still live in a very proud communist regime. No election, no freedom, nothing. So the magnitude of the problem is so big that we need to address this. Plus, China is a powerful nation, very smart in finding ways to lure other countries, democratic countries.

So I think it is needed to expose the real nature of China. China is a liberty-killing regime. They persecute all religions in different ways, but all religions, and especially so-called minority groups. And they do it in a very harsh way. And we see that sometimes in the West, the topic is not addressed as it deserves.

Mr. Jekielek:
Please give us a sense of the magnitude of the issue.

Mr. Respinti:
A very fine Chinese scholar on religion, Fenggang Yang, a few years ago, described the relationship between the Chinese communist state and religions using the metaphor of three markets, the gray, the black, and the red markets. He says religion can be divided into these three markets when it comes to the relationship they have with the Chinese Communist Party.

The red market is where the Chinese Communist Party and the state tolerates or releases groups or churches. And when I say tolerates, it means that most of the time they infiltrate them and they try to control them from inside. This started back in the 50s, establishing the so-called patriotic Buddhist, Catholic, Protestant, Muslim and Taoist associations. It was a way to infiltrate those churches because it would not be possible for the government, even if so powerful, to destroy them completely. So they tried to control them from inside, infiltrating them.

And then there is the black market. The black market is the place where the groups, religious groups, are described by the regime with a Chinese expression, xie jiao. It’s an old expression in China that means heterodox teaching. The Chinese Communist Party revived that old expression, xie jiao, and retranslated it as the word cult, which was well known in the West. Scholars have abandoned the use of the word cult, because cult is a derogatory term that has no limit and no boundaries. Basically, it’s a way by which the power, whatever it would be, is used to put people aside.

Mr. Jekielek:
To smear them, basically.

Mr. Respinti:
Yes. So it’s debunked and it’s not used by scholars. And there are illegal decisions that say that it should not be used in many countries, that it should not be used in international treaties and documents, official
documents. But what the Chinese Communist Party does is to compile a list and they put all the groups that they can directly repress. Why? Because they have large numbers of faithful but for many reasons are not well known and not well defended abroad. The government has almost a free hand in repressing them.

The black market of religion is the place where you have the largest number of deaths in suspicious conditions in custody. These people are arrested for just having religious books or praying together or not renouncing their faith. You have torture, you have violence on women, you have all kinds of bad things on these individuals and groups. Again, most of this happens because these groups are not well-known, not well-connected abroad.

Then we have the gray market, which is kind of between the red and the black market, and it’s the place where the regime is not able, doesn’t have the force to completely destroy these groups. It does not have the force to infiltrate them, so it more or less tolerates these groups. But as a matter of fact, Fenggang Yang and other scholars elaborating on this model, which has been brought about a few years ago, are now saying that this gray market is slowly disappearing.

Because the power of the state is so growing, the groups belonging to the grey market go into the red market, meaning totally directly infiltrated by the government, or they tend to be put in the list of the black markets, the cults, and then destroy the other. So the grey market is a model that scholars use, but it tends to disappear in recent years. They will be red or black. They will be directly infiltrated or directly repressed.

Mr. Jekielek:
Broadly speaking, these groups that are targeted by the regime that you call the black category, give me some examples of some of the things that you’ve come across of this type of persecution of people? It might be difficult for some people to comprehend it.

Mr. Respinti:
I will name two of the groups. There is a whole list, and I will name two of the most famous groups in that list; Falun Gong and the Church of the Almighty God. These people have been detained in horrible conditions and tortured. Some of them became mad because of what they suffered in prison. I will not go into much detail what women suffer when they are raped. We published the graphic descriptions in our Bitter Winter magazine.

We had the plight of organ harvesting, which started with targeting Falun Gong in the old days, but we now know that it went also to the Tibetans and the Uyghurs. We also have cases of the practitioners of the Church of the Almighty God. Again, I don’t want to go into details. But what happens to people when their organs are harvested, some of them are still alive when this operation takes place, and they suffer all kinds of terrible things. It’s not easy to hear the testimony of these people who survived that have been given to us and other journalists.

I wonder how a human being can do those things to another human being and take part of his body to sell them to people for money. I don’t want to touch on the sensibilities of people who need transplants, which is another topic. How can you do that to other human beings and make an industry out of it? Of course, the Chinese government is denying this happens, but we know for sure that it happens.

First of all, the number of death executions in China is a state secret. This is especially done on the groups listed as cults in the black market. Again, why? Because most of them are not known or not well established or not well connected abroad. Not all of them, some of them are.But this is why we need to talk more about this problem.

Mr. Jekielek:
The Chinese regime doesn’t just persecute these groups within its own borders. It actually has quite some great efforts. I’ve interviewed Uyghurs, I’ve interviewed Tibetans, I’ve interviewed Falun Gong practitioners, I’ve interviewed democracy activists from Hong Kong, for example, all of which are persecuted in severe ways here in America, Canada, Europe, and in other countries. What is the thinking there?

Mr. Respinti:
Transnational repression has been documented by associations, think tanks, and activist groups that deal with religious liberty in China. It’s a well-established fact. How long can democratic countries tolerate that people on their land are attacked, harassed by a foreign country? That is a violation of the sovereignty of democratic countries. This is a huge international problem, and quite clearly, parliaments and citizens need to address this. It’s a plight that is growing.

Why is it growing? Things don’t remain stable. Either they become worse or they become better. In this case, if we don’t act, and if politicians don’t act, it will tend to expand. We have seen countries where Chinese policemen can easily go in the streets. There are countries where secret Chinese police stations have been quietly established. For what reason? Why can a democratic society tolerate this infringement on its sovereignty?

And let’s go back to the people, the people who escaped China trying to find a safe harbor in other countries like Italy, Canada, or the United States of America. Do we want them to fear for their safety in our free country because China has a free hand to get after them? I think politics needs to address that.

Mr. Jekielek:
We’ve been seeing each other the last few years at these international religious freedom summits here in Washington, D.C. What is the significance of this event? What is the value of it?

Mr. Respinti:
As far as I understand, this is one of the most successful experiments in bringing together different religious leaders from all over the world, persecuted people, put them around the table, not just to chat, but to confront, share experience, and try to affect public society and even governments possibly with real concrete examples and testimonies.
I think this is the most successful experiment in trying to really build a movement of religious liberty defenders, which is not a common thing. I think this is something unique, and it’s so far very successful.

It took place in different countries. In Europe there are imitations of this model. It has been done in Taiwan, Japan, and other places. Building this new coalition must address this most important topic. Sam Brownback, one of the initiators of this, just today said, we’re not going to stop. Religious liberty is being violated in many places, directly or indirectly. We need to fight for the people who suffer on the ground. I’m a journalist. We live in the democratic West. We’re in a comfortable location. Those people suffer. It’s very important.

Mr. Jekielek:
You’re a devout Catholic. It’s not necessarily obvious that someone of a particular faith should be standing up for people of other faiths.

Mr. Respinti:
Sometimes it is not, but I would say that it should be. If you’re a believer, whatever religion, your first duty would be, I think, to defend the freedom of people of whatever religion to exercise that religion, because otherwise I wonder what you really believe in. If you don’t believe that the relationship of a human being with God is so important to be defended at all costs, I wonder how serious you can consider your personal relationship to God in your own tradition.

To answer more directly, as a Roman Catholic, I feel that it’s my strong duty to defend the freedom of every human being to enjoy the freedom I have. God has given liberty to all faiths, including Catholics, Muslims, and Buddhists. This is one of the qualities that make human beings similar to God. We should respect that and defend that at whatever cost.

Mr. Jekielek:
In terms of success, have there been tangible changes in policy or reductions in persecution of religions through the work of the IRF summit?

Mr. Respinti:
Yes, sometimes laws have been passed, and sometimes things that were not known to many people came to the surface. This is very important because totalitarian regimes and prosecutors, when a case, a group are highlighted and become public, they kind of step back a little bit in what they do because they have the light of the world on them. So exposing cases of obscure, unknown groups is very much important and it’s effective. This can bring about legislation like the Uyghur Forced Labor Protection Act.

It was born out of wonderful lobbying work that Uyghurs and their friends did in this country that has been going on for a while, with the help of the International Religious Freedom summit. Much more needs to be done. One third of the people that I met in the meeting today, I saw in a roundtable that precedes the IRF summit. This is a good sign. More people are getting in, and more people are willing to be recognized as a friend of religious liberty. If it’s true what we said before, this is quite a noble task. Maybe there is nothing like this on earth.

Mr. Jekielek:
The U.S. has been involved in all sorts of engagements around the world. Some people have described it as the world’s policeman. And there’s a shift in thinking, a desire to not have America be as engaged in so many different things, so many different places. What do you think America’s role should be in this type of a context, as someone that’s looking in from the outside, as someone who is obviously a lover of the American idea and of the independence and liberty that it fosters?

Mr. Respinti:
Being an Italian national, I don’t want another country to run my country and I think this is fair to say even in the face of a country which I respect. Yes, some people are right when they say that America should not be arrogant, be the policeman of the world and run the show all over the
world. Fine. This is easy to say but let me repeat it. Western Europe should be thankful for the freedom they have because Americans died for that freedom. So we should never forget that.

The role that America had in liberating directly or indirectly Eastern Europe is another point. But the most important thing to me is that the American idea can be contagious to other countries. Every country should find its own way within its own tradition to address what the American founding is addressing for America. America found its own way.

All the countries need to find their own way to address the same question, but the question should be the same and it should be posed in the same correct way. What is it that can grant freedom to human beings? America has found a way to try to respond and answer to this question in quite an interesting way. All countries should do the same within their own tradition. If they find a good example elsewhere, they could imitate that.

The American founding and then the whole American experience addresses this most fundamental question, what is liberty? What is the way for human beings to guarantee that liberty? This doesn’t mean that America doesn’t have its faults. It does. Everything that is human does. But America has tried and has so far succeeded.

Mr. Jekielek:
What is the correct role for America or any functioning liberal democracy?

Mr. Respinti:
Inspiration and support, and if needed, help to be yourself.

Mr. Jekielek:
This help question is the one that’s hard. What does that mean? What is appropriate and what isn’t appropriate?

Mr. Respinti:
It depends on the situation, I think. There is no metaphysical answer to this. It’s according to the situation. I’m not against military, political, economic help from America, if it is limited, clear, transparent, and supportive of a good cause. There may be occasions where these things are needed. When I’m thinking of military intervention, it would be like in Europe under Nazi rule. That was a pretty clear answer. Again, it should be limited, should be correct, should be transparent, and should be well-drafted. It could happen.

Mr. Jekielek:
What do you hope will happen through this opportunity to meet with these advocates for religious freedom?

Mr. Respinti:
To learn from them. The most interesting and even emotional part is meeting with survivors, with refugees, with people who really escaped
persecution just for what they believe. This is unbelievable that people can be killed, arrested, tortured, raped, organ harvested for what they believe. It literally blows my mind. You can meet people, look them in the eye and be saluted by someone that you don’t remember. But she or he remembers you because you wrote an article, and they greet you and thank you. That makes you learn the importance of what is not just a job, but a vocation.

Mr. Jekielek:
Is there an example of your work where you saw it translate into helping someone?

Mr. Respinti:
I will not go into details, because I cannot reveal some names because of security for them, but we were able to stop the repatriation of a person into the People’s Republic of China, and it was almost done. The thing was almost done. And these people had a relevant role in a religious group, so we knew for sure that what could easily happen to this person once repatriated was simply death. We were able to stop it almost at the last minute, and this person is now free in a free country. Unfortunately, it doesn’t happen every other day. It’s quite rare, because we are confronted by big powers. We are just a magazine with some connection to a group of activists.

Mr. Jekielek:
You have access to people inside China who risk quite a lot. We cultivate deep sources inside China and the regime. These people are risking everything to share information, and you have that. You’ve earned that trust.

Mr. Respinti:
Yes, we have that. Unfortunately, it’s decreasing these days in numbers, the content we have, because the Chinese regime is very smart. Let me remind you that in the first six to eight months of our existence online as
a magazine, some 40 people who were connected to us on the ground were arrested in China, and half of them more or less have been released sooner or later, and half of them simply disappeared. So we know nothing about that. That is the value of the work we can do with people in China, on the ground, giving us information. That is invaluable, but it’s becoming difficult, and it has risks. So all the credit should go to those people, not to us.

Mr. Jekielek:
For those people, it’s very valuable.

Mr. Respinti:
Yes, this is why they thank us for what we do, but as a matter of fact, it’s us thanking them. Because, as I always say, they deserve all the credit. They are the people who suffer. I’m just a reporter and I tell stories, hopefully true stories. But they suffer, and they deserve all the credits. Many times I see them at meetings after they have escaped and they thank us. I always say, no, it’s us thanking you.

Mr. Jekielek:
Marco, this has been a wonderful conversation. Do you have a final thought as we finish up?

Mr. Respinti:
Religion is the most important asset for a human being. This is not preaching. This is an objective thing. the faculty of a human being to address the most important question in life. If God exists, your life is shaped in a way. If God doesn’t exist, whatever the name you give to him or her, your life takes another away.

So we must always give this possibility to every single person. The world will not be free and humanity will not be accomplished until all the people will be free to say God exists or or doesn’t exist and to live accordingly. The consequences are between them and God if it exists, as I believe, but that is another topic. We as human beings should grant all human beings this fundamental, non-renounceable freedom.

Mr. Jekielek:
Marco Respinti, it’s such a pleasure to have you on the show.

Mr. Respinti:
It’s my pleasure, totally.