For Tuesday’s edition of Amanpour and Company on PBS and CNN International, host Christiane Amanpour welcomed Victor Gao of the China National Association of International Studies to praise China’s zero-COVID policy and condemn the protestors calling for Xi Jinping’s removal. While it would not be fair to say Amanpour lobbed softballs to Gao, she was not as tough as she should’ve been.
After Gao, whose Wikipedia page also describes him as a “media spokesman for the Chinese Communist Party,” Amanpour asked “We pose the question of what will the government do, given that, you know, any sort of lifting or sudden lifting of restrictions could cause a massive outbreak. What does the government fear most?”
Gao again condemned the protestors while praising the zero-COVID policy, “This is a very important question. Before answering your question, allow me to make one brief point. Some of the protesters were calling for human rights. I would advise them that actually the most important human rights as far as China's concerned is the life-- the right to life. So, without life, you lose every political rights you may want to achieve.”
He also claimed China is better than the U.S. in this regard, “Therefore, as a result of the dynamic zero-COVID policy, China saved a minimum of one million lives, or even up to about 10 million lives. And I reached these numbers using the U.S. death number as a reference point. After all, China's population is more than four times larger as that of the United States. So, whoever -- who are unhappy about the zero-COVID policy should be reminding themselves of a massive amount of lives that China has managed to save over the past three years.”
Instead of questioning Communist Party statistics, Amanpour gave credence to the claim, “clearly, many people feel that yes, yes, you're right. There were a lot of lives saved compared to the U.S., Brazil, et cetera.”
It is notable Amanpour picked the U.S. and Brazil, countries that were led by Donald Trump and Jair Bolsonaro, two men she despises, and every other country gets lumped in with “et cetera.” As for Gao’s claim that China instituted the zero-COVID policy because it cares about human rights, while Amanpour did not bring up the awful state of human rights in China she did manage to ask, “However, this is three years and they're feeling like life is being snuffed out. I just want to play you the sound from a protester in Hong Kong. He's very concerned, you know, that he can't get back home. Here's what he said.”
After playing a clip of a Hong Kong protestor condemning the policy because it banned him for visiting his parents and that he had friends commit suicide because of the policy, Amanpour asked if three years was enough.
Gao responded by claiming that China is shifting strategies, but the real problem is the protestors, “And this is exactly the time when the whole nation in China needs to be united rather than accusing each other, for example, or even trying to bring in chaos or anarchy into China, which is the last thing that the majority of the people in China want.”
Amanpour did not rebut the “chaos or anarchy” talking point, instead choosing to move onto vaccine efficacy and reciprocity.
This segment was sponsored by viewers like you.
Here is a transcript for the November 28-taped show:
PBS Amanpour and Company
11/29/2022
1:05 AM ET
AMANPOUR: So, Mr. Gao, you know, there's a famous quote, “you would say that, wouldn't you?” Of course, I understand that you oppose those protests calling for the removal of Xi Jinping, calling for more freedom. But what is the government’s option? You said that they must do something. They must get to the bottom of it. We pose the question of what will the government do, given that, you know, any sort of lifting or sudden lifting of restrictions could cause a massive outbreak. What does the government fear most?
GAO: Thank you, Christiane. This is a very important question. Before answering your question, allow me to make one brief point. Some of the protesters were calling for human rights. I would advise them that actually the most important human rights as far as China's concerned is the life-- the right to life. So, without life, you lose every political rights you may want to achieve.
Therefore, as a result of the dynamic zero-COVID policy, China saved a minimum of one million lives, or even up to about 10 million lives. And I reached these numbers using the U.S. death number as a reference point. After all, China's population is more than four times larger as that of the United States.
So, whoever -- who are unhappy about the zero-COVID policy should be reminding themselves of a massive amount of lives that China has managed to save over the past three years.
AMANPOUR: Okay
GAO: Now, you talk –
AMANPOUR: Yeah. I just want to pick you up on that.
GAO: Yes, this is a –
AMANPOUR: Because clearly, many people feel that yes, yes, you're right. There were a lot of lives saved compared to the U.S., Brazil, et cetera. However, this is three years and they're feeling like life is being snuffed out. I just want to play you the sound from a protester in Hong Kong. He's very concerned, you know, that he can't get back home. Here's what he said.
HONG KONG RESIDENT: I am a victim.
UNIDENTIFIED MALE: How so?
HONG KONG RESIDENT: I cannot go home for many years, like, two to three years, right. My parents were locked down for three months. And even relatives of my good friends, they suicide because of the lockdowns, right. And I know people die because of it. Because of the side effects of this policy, right. I think everyone who has the same mind should say something or do something to stop this unreasonable social measure.
AMANPOUR: So, I mean look, at this all started -- you heard what he said, suicides and unreasonable measures after three years. And remember, we're talking about three years now. And that fire in Urumqi is considered -- and the video seemed to suggest that the firefighters could not reach the fire because of the COVID barriers that were outside. So, if you are advising the government, what would you say?
GAO: Well, first of all, China is right now in the middle of a transition from the original version of the anti-virus strategy which really focused on minimizing deaths and infections to a new paradigm which needs to pursue two goals. One still is minimizing deaths and infections. But on the other hand, equally important if not more important, to achieve higher level of normalcy of life for the people and restoring economic activities to the normal course of activities. Both goals are very important.
We try to pursue the first goal for the past three years. Now is the time to make that big transition into pursuing two goals. Now, in making this transition, it will involve a lot of uncertainty. Many difficulties. And this is exactly the time when the whole nation in China needs to be united rather than accusing each other, for example, or even trying to bring in chaos or anarchy into China, which is the last thing that the majority of the people in China want.
So, I think we need to be very scientific. We need to rally behind the government in making sure that China goes through the transition smoothly, with less cost, with less deaths, and with less people getting infected in this transitional period.
