【新唐人2012年2月18日訊】重慶副市長王立軍闖入美領館，期間到底做了甚麼？美領館為甚麼沒有給他政治庇護？成為各界關心的話題。最近美國眾議院對行政當局就處理王立軍的事件，也開始展開調查。不過學者認為，美領館不給王立軍政治庇護是明智之舉，國會進行調查體現了美國三權分立的優越性。
繼美國眾議員羅拉巴克爾提出要調查行政當局處理王立軍案的方式以後，眾議院外交委員會主席羅絲.雷提南(Ileana Ros-Lehtinen))正式給國務卿克林頓發函，要求政府儘快提交報告，詳細說明王立軍在2月6號進入總領館後發生的一切。
羅絲．雷提南在公函中寫道，王立軍到底有沒有提出庇護要求？如果提出了，美國方面為了國家利益和王立軍的個人安全，又採取了哪些行動和措施？
時政評論家曹長青認為，美國國務院和眾議院的做法都非常正確。
曹長青：「從道義上的方面，我覺得美國政府拒絕給王立軍政治庇護是對的，就是不給中共的貪官開綠燈，但是同時美國政府來調查歐巴馬政府的舉動，制約歐巴馬政府不可以隨便的、隨意的和胡錦濤政權背後交易，也是對的，作為美國國會是一個重要的監督機構、立法機構，是美國最重要的機構，那麼國會來調查，就是來制約政府不可以亂來。」
「普林斯頓中國學社」執行主席陳奎德認為，按照美國的慣例，如果一個中國人，特別是有一定權力的中國人，冒險跑進美國大使館求援，美國是會保護，但王立軍不是異議人士，只是內部權力問題，美國政府是在北京能保護王立軍脫離重慶威脅的情況下，拒絕了王立軍的政治庇護請求。
陳奎德：「王立軍這個事件涉及到中共高層的政治權力鬥爭，美國從它的基本立國原則來說，他是要關心中國人權，關心其他各個國家的人權的，但是王立軍這件事情上，如果他覺得他還可以通過其他的方式，也就是不是政治庇護的方式，而通過其他方式使他免於當時就受到人權方面的嚴重侵害，甚至生命消失，寧可使用其他的辦法。」
曹長青認為，像王立軍這種手上沾滿了人民血債的人，如果美國給他政治庇護是不公平的。
曹長青：「搖身一變，又變成自由人了，用這些貪污腐敗來的錢，在美國又可以花天酒地了，這成何邏輯，成何體統，所以我覺得美國不應該給中共的這些高官貪官，尤其是有血債公安局長們政治庇護。我們不說別的問題，就光說迫害法輪功這一件事，王立軍就犯下了反人類罪，就這一個反人類罪，他不僅不能得到美國使館的政治庇護，他應該送到海牙國際法庭接受審理。」
隨著王立軍向美國政府爆料，美國政府掌握大量中共高層機密，這將成為中共當局未來走勢的關鍵。
陳奎德說，王立軍事件讓中共的「權力黑箱作業」公開化，對中國人們有益。
陳奎德：「這次事件使得中共的內部鬥爭也加入了國際化的因素，草率的想把它了結，把它遮掩已經辦不到了，所以從某種意義上，這種國際化情況，使得中國的權力鬥爭被投入了一束光，我覺得對中國人了解中國的政治生態、中國上層的權力鬥爭，也包括保障自己的基本人權都是有好處的。」
曹長青認為，王立軍的叛逃事件對中共的打擊，相當於「林彪叛逃事件」。
新唐人記者常春、劉惠、李若琳採訪報導。
————————-
U.S. House of Representatives proposes to investigate
Wang Lijun incident
When Chongqing vice Mayor Wang Lijun broke into the U.S.
Consulate, what had he actually done?
Why didn’t the U.S. consulate give him political asylum?
It has become a topic of concern of the public.
How the Administration dealt with Wang Lijun incident,
was recently investigated by U.S. House of Representatives.
However, scholars believe that the U.S. Consulate’s not
granting political asylum to Wang Lijun is a wise move.
The Congress conducting an investigation indicates the
superiority of the separation of powers in the United States.
U.S. Rep. Laura Barker proposed to investigate how the
Administration dealt with Wang Lijun incident.
Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, head of Foreign Affairs Committee,
formally wrote to Secretary of State Clinton.
The Government was urged to submit a detailed report
quickly to explain what happened on February 6th after
Wang Lijun entered the Consulate General.
Ros-Lehtinen asked in the letter whether in the end
Wang Lijun requested asylum or not?
If he requested it, what actions or measures did the consulate
take for U.S. national interest & Wang Lijun’s personal safety?
Cao Changqing, political critic, said that the practice of the
U.S. State Department and the House are very correct.
Cao Changqing: “From the moral aspect, I think it is correct
the U.S. government refused to give Wang Lijun asylum.
This is not giving the green light to the corrupt officials of
CCP (Chinese Communist Party).
However, it is also correct that at the same time the U.S.
government investigates the Obama administration’s move.
Restricting the Obama government from arbitrarily doing deals
with Hu’s government behind the scenes.
As an important institution of supervision and legislation, U.S.
Congress is one of the most important institutions in America.
The Congress having an investigation is to restrain the U.S.
government from acting recklessly.”
Chen Kuide, Executive Chairman of Princeton China Initiative,
said that according to U.S. conventions,
if a Chinese, certainly one with a certain power, came into the
U.S. Embassy for help the United States will provide protection.
But Wang Lijun is not a dissident. It’s only the issue of
their internal power struggles.
Because Beijing can protect Wang Lijun from Chongqing’s,
threat U.S. Government refused Wang Lijun’s asylum request.
Chen Kuide: “Wang Lijun’s incident is related to political
power struggle of CCP high-level officials.
According to its founding principles of the United States,
it needs to care for human rights in China.
It also needs to care for human rights in all other countries.
But as for the Wang Lijun incident, if U.S. feels it can use
another way, namely not political asylum,
and another way can keep him from serious human rights
violations or death, it would rather use another way.”
Cao Changqing believes that for a person like Lijun,
whose hands are stained with the blood of the people,
it is not right if the United States gives him political asylum.
Cao Changqing: “He can suddenly become a free man, using
embezzled funds and squandering them in the United States.
How can it be allowed? What would it look like?
So I think the U.S. should not give political asylum to the
corrupt top CCP especially the chief police with blood debts.
Just making the point about the persecution of Falun Gong,
for only this, Wang Lijun committed crimes against humanity.
For this crime of against humanity, he not only can’t get
political asylum from the United States.
He also should be sent to the Hague Tribunal to stand trial.”
With Wang Lijun disclosing secrets to the American government,
the U.S. government holds a large number of confidential of CCP high-level officials.
It will play a key role for the future trend of CCP authorities.
Chen Kuide said Wang Lijun incident makes the “black box
of power struggle” open. It is beneficial to the Chinese people.
Chen Kuide: “This incident adds internal factors into
the CCP inner power struggles, making it impossible to end it rashly and hide it.
So from a certain sense, this international situation makes a
beam of light add into the CCP’s power struggles.
I think it is good for Chinese people to understand China’s
political environments and the power struggles of CCP high officials.
It is also good for protecting their basic human rights.”
Cao Changqing believes that Wang Lijun’s defection
against CCP is equivalent to “the defection of Lin Biao”.
NTD Reporters Chang Chun, Liu Hui and Li Ruolin
