【新唐人2012年2月18日讯】重庆副市长王立军闯入美领馆，期间到底做了什么？美领馆为什么没有给他政治庇护？成为各界关心的话题。最近美国众议院对行政当局就处理王立军的事件，也开始展开调查。不过学者认为，美领馆不给王立军政治庇护是明智之举，国会进行调查体现了美国三权分立的优越性。
继美国众议员罗拉巴克尔提出要调查行政当局处理王立军案的方式以后，众议院外交委员会主席罗丝.雷提南(Ileana Ros-Lehtinen))正式给国务卿克林顿发函，要求政府尽快提交报告，详细说明王立军在2月6号进入总领馆后发生的一切。
罗丝．雷提南在公函中写道，王立军到底有没有提出庇护要求？如果提出了，美国方面为了国家利益和王立军的个人安全，又采取了哪些行动和措施？
时政评论家曹长青认为，美国国务院和众议院的做法都非常正确。
曹长青：“从道义上的方面，我觉得美国政府拒绝给王立军政治庇护是对的，就是不给中共的贪官开绿灯，但是同时美国政府来调查欧巴马政府的举动，制约欧巴马政府不可以随便的、随意的和胡锦涛政权背后交易，也是对的，作为美国国会是一个重要的监督机构、立法机构，是美国最重要的机构，那么国会来调查，就是来制约政府不可以乱来。”
“普林斯顿中国学社”执行主席陈奎德认为，按照美国的惯例，如果一个中国人，特别是有一定权力的中国人，冒险跑进美国大使馆求援，美国是会保护，但王立军不是异议人士，只是内部权力问题，美国政府是在北京能保护王立军脱离重庆威胁的情况下，拒绝了王立军的政治庇护请求。
陈奎德：“王立军这个事件涉及到中共高层的政治权力斗争，美国从它的基本立国原则来说，他是要关心中国人权，关心其他各个国家的人权的，但是王立军这件事情上，如果他觉得他还可以通过其他的方式，也就是不是政治庇护的方式，而通过其他方式使他免于当时就受到人权方面的严重侵害，甚至生命消失，宁可使用其他的办法。”
曹长青认为，像王立军这种手上沾满了人民血债的人，如果美国给他政治庇护是不公平的。
曹长青：“摇身一变，又变成自由人了，用这些贪污腐败来的钱，在美国又可以花天酒地了，这成何逻辑，成何体统，所以我觉得美国不应该给中共的这些高官贪官，尤其是有血债公安局长们政治庇护。我们不说别的问题，就光说迫害法轮功这一件事，王立军就犯下了反人类罪，就这一个反人类罪，他不仅不能得到美国使馆的政治庇护，他应该送到海牙国际法庭接受审理。”
随着王立军向美国政府爆料，美国政府掌握大量中共高层机密，这将成为中共当局未来走势的关键。
陈奎德说，王立军事件让中共的“权力黑箱作业”公开化，对中国人们有益。
陈奎德：“这次事件使得中共的内部斗争也加入了国际化的因素，草率的想把它了结，把它遮掩已经办不到了，所以从某种意义上，这种国际化情况，使得中国的权力斗争被投入了一束光，我觉得对中国人了解中国的政治生态、中国上层的权力斗争，也包括保障自己的基本人权都是有好处的。”
曹长青认为，王立军的叛逃事件对中共的打击，相当于“林彪叛逃事件”。
新唐人记者常春、刘惠、李若琳采访报导。
————————-
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
