PRINCETON, N.J. - In the wake of the death Jan. 17 of Zhao Ziyang, the former general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party, Epoch Times reporter Xin Fei interviewed renowned Sinologist Lin Peirui (Perry Link), professor of the Department of East Asia Research at Princeton University.

Lin obtained a Ph.D. degree of Chinese history in Harvard University long ago, and is one of the very few Chinese experts among American Sinologists. In 1972, he acted as interpreter when the Chinese ping-pong delegation visited America. During the events surrounding June 4, 1989, the Tiananmen Square Massacre, he was the director of Chinese-based office of the U.S. National Academy of Sciences. As one of the three editors of "the Tiananmen Document," which is the English version of "The Truth of the Chinese June 4th Event," he was listed on the blacklist of admission exclusion by the Chinese government.

Xin: As an expert of Chinese issues, how would you like to appraise Mr. Zhao Ziyang?

Lin: That is hard to say in a few words. At the beginning of the ’80s, he carried out reform in the countryside and allowed farmers to cultivate their own land. That is quite a significant contribution. Secondly, in the one and half years from 1987 to 1989 and before the June 4th event, I think that is the most open 18 months in politics since the Chinese Communist Party seized power. It has to do with the fact that he was the general secretary of the Chinese Communist Party then. Although he was purged after the June 4th events, he basically supported the students and opposed the violence. This is also his active contribution.

Xin: What do you think is the difference between Zhao and other Chinese Communist Party leaders?

Lin: These two contributions are quite prominent. It is hard to say that other leaders are as good, especially Jiang Zemin and Hu Jintao. They do not possess his contributions, personality and historical image obviously.

Xin: Why do you think the supreme leader of the party also suffered suppression at the hands of the CCP, put under house arrest for so many years and robbed of the freedom of speech?

Lin: That is because the higher leaders care about issues in several aspects. Most of all, they care about their power. That is the value of top priority. Therefore, whatever role Zhao could play if he were free doesn’t matter. Their only concern was that he could upset their hold on power; it is their top priority. Therefore they put him under house arrest. It is a quite unenlightened approach, but for a regime with centralized power, it is exactly the way things work.

Xin: It is reported that the CCP is hesitating about whether to hold a memorial ceremony for Zhao and has not made its final decision. How do you view this issue?

Lin: That is also their authority and the issue they need to consider carefully.

I believe that before Zhao’s death, when he was critically ill, they definitely had started to discuss this very delicate issue. It is truly a very difficult topic. After all, Zhao was their general secretary. It sounds strange not to hold a memorial ceremony for him.

Song Renqiong, a leader of the Political Bureau whom the current official likes most, died at the age of 96 several days ago. The CCP held a grand memorial ceremony for him, and nine members of the Political Bureau, plus Jiang Zemin, all showed up. Several days later, Zhao passed away. Compared with Song Renqiong, Zhao’s contribution is more powerful and important. Therefore it seems extremely insensitive for them not to hold a memorial ceremony for him.

Xin: According to reports, someone inside the party proposed to restore the reputation of Zhao and rectify the conclusion for the June 4th event. How do you view this phenomenon? Can it create an internal division within the Chinese Communist Party?

Lin: I believe so. In my opinion, the division can be horizontal or vertical. Vertically, the leaders in higher level may rupture as happened in 1989. It is very difficult for me to forecast. Horizontally, I always think there is division between superficial consciousness and in-depth consciousness. Many people sympathize with reform and Zhao Ziyang, but are not willing to express this idea in public.

In 1989, Liu Binyan extrapolated that about 70 percent of general members of the CCP in Beijing sympathized with the student movement, and only a minority did not. I believed that is true. Until now, many party members are not satisfied with the way of totalitarianism and expect political reform. But it is hard for them to see daylight.

Xin: Why has the regime of the Chinese Communist Party been able to last such a long time?

Lin: This is a big issue. Have you ever read the assay of Yang Jianli? He likes to analyze this issue. Violence is one factor, lying is another and the third one is the bureaucrat system. Inside the system, although many officials know that they are doing what is clearly against their wills, they will still follow the system for their own interests. All the three factors play roles.

Xin: Do you think Hu Jintao and Wen Jiabao will reform China to democracy and the legal system?

Lin: I do not think they will take the initiative to do so. Two years ago, we all expected that they would take some measures on their own initiative. But it is quite obvious now. Especially Hu Jintao. His thought is quite narrow, quite conservative, and his imagination is quite insufficient. He accepted the CCP’s education. That is his basic education. So he would not to do it. He may do so passively under the pressure of outside power or common people’s revolt. He would not bestow common people from above. That is my opinion.

Xin: Currently, there are many resistance movements inside China. What is your view on this issue?

Lin: The major force is not the intellectuals now. The most effective force includes farmers, unemployed workers and Falun Gong practitioners. I agree with continual resistance.