John Aird, China Demographer and Critic, R.I.P.
As the head of the China branch of the U.S. Census Bureau, John Aird watched in honor as the one-child policy unfolded in the early ’80s. He concluded that the Chinese family planning program was being carried out “against the popular will by means of a variety of coercive measures. Despite official denials and intermittent efforts to discourage some of the more extreme manifestations, since the early 1970s if not before, coercion has been an integral part of the program .… Mandatory IUD insertions, sterilizations, and abortion continue.”1
Most demographers, especially those in the China field like Mr. Aird. either remained silent about abuses in China’s one-child policy, or they actively applauded it. Mr. Aird, on the other hand, risked his professional reputation by becoming China’s most cogent critic. “‘The Chinese program remains highly coercive.” he wrote, “not because of local deviations from central policies but as a direct, inevitable, and intentional consequence of those policies.”2 Based on literally thousands of documents reviewed during a decades-long professional career, Mr. Aird’s opinions were indisputable.
Supporters of Coercion
Mr. Aird was at least as horrified by the active participation of family planning organizations in China’s program as he was by the program itself. He concluded that organizations such as the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA) and the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF), by praising and funding China’s program, were not only turning their backs on universal principles of human rights, but also betraying their own charters. Such organizations spoke loftily of “voluntarism” and the “rights of parents to decide for themselves the number and spacing of their children” and then turned right around and supported coercion.
As he wrote, “In 1979, as the Chinese government was initiating its highly coercive one-child policy, the UNFPA was negotiating the first of three five-year programmes of assistance to that governments ‘population activities,’ including family planning, and committing $50 million for the purpose. In 1983, the peak year for coercion in the Chinese programme, a United Nations committee on which Rafael Salas, then head of the UNFPA, served as adviser, gave the first two UN population awards to Indian Prime Minister Indira Ghandi, whose government had approved compulsory sterilization in the 1970s, and Qian Xinzhong, Minister-in-Charge of the State Family Planning Commission, who directed the 1983 surgery drive. In the same year, the government’s family planning effort was welcomed to full membership in the IPPF. In subsequent years the IPPF has provided more than $8 million to the Chinese family planning programme.”3
An Indictment of Beijing
With the publication of Slaughter of the Innocents in 1990, he publicly broke ranks with the family-planning establishment, and documented in excruciating detail what they had heretofore largely ignored. This several-hundred-page indictment of the Beijing regime and its foreign sycophants remains required reading today for anyone who would understand China’s population control policy. It is the authoritative treatment of the one-child policy and the means by which it is being implemented in China today,
“Mr. Aird frequently testified before the U.S. Congress, and was often consulted by the State Department, providing both with expert advice on the current state of the population control program in China. For example, when the Bush administration decided to send a State Department delegation to China in 2002 to examine the UNFPA’s involvement in China’s one-child policy, it called upon John Aird to brief the assembled delegates. His information was critical to the Bush Administrations decision to withhold U.S. funding from the UNFPA, a decision that has been reaffirmed each year since.
Mr. Aird also testified before the Congressional-Executive Commission on China on China’s New Family Planning Law (September 23, 2002), debunking the notion that this was an effort to liberalize or relax the policy. “Misleading claims about the law are being put forward by Chinese family planning officials and by apologists for the Chinese program,” Mr. Aird stated, “but its true purpose has been made clear in Chinese domestic sources from the start. It is intended to increase the government’s control over child-bearing in order to reduce the numbers of births and hold down the rate of population growth. This is quite clear from the explanations given in Chinese sources during earlier attempts to draft a national law.”
Mr. Aird’s exhaustive review of the Chinese family planning literature — of which he had a better grasp then any other in the West — told him that throughout the 23 years of its gestation, the essential rationale for the national family planning law had remained unchanged. The Chinese government was determined to strengthen enforcement of the existing family planning policies and reinforce government control over child-bearing in order to overcome stubborn popular resistance. The government saw the law as an additional means of compulsion. He testified that the only reason that Beijing, beginning in 2002, began to misrepresent it as an effort to curb coercion, was to limit and disarm foreign criticism.
Aird and PRI Agree
As he testified, the Population Research Institute’s “investigative team…had found coercive measures still in force in one of the UNFPA’s project counties, where such measures were supposed to have been abolished. This report embarrassed both the Chinese government and the UNFPA, and the UNFPA hastily put together an ‘independent’ team with close UN connections to go to the same county, obviously with the intent of finding no coercion, which, hosted and escorted by both the government and the UNFPA, it naturally did not find. After the report of the U.S. State Department investigative team’s visit to China in May 2002, released in July, confirmed the persistence of coercive measures in China, it was obvious that China’s new law needed to be given a softer image. Hence the subsequent official statements from Chinese sources disavowing the only reasonable raison d’etre for such a law!”
Mr. Aird went on to compare the press releases intended for a foreign audience with those directed at the Chinese themselves, which were much harsher in tone. A September 1, 2002, XINHUA-English dispatch stated that “public satisfaction [was] the top priority.” (XINIHUA-English, Beijing, August 31, 2002) But the XINHUA domestic dispatch on the same day said that the new law was intended to “stabiliz[e] the child-bearing policy currently in force, gain a better understanding of citizens’ obligations to practice family planning, understand the legal provisions concerned, and enhance their consciousness in practicing family planning.” (XINHUA, Domestic Service, Beijing, August 31, 2002) Mr. Aird was well-versed in Chinese family planning doublespeak, writing tongue-in-cheek that “From these strange contradictions, one might have supposed the references were to two different laws!”
Mr. Aird scoffed at the notion that the new law would curb coercion in family planning, pointing out that it did not demand an end to the coercive tactics that have characterized the program from the beginning. As he wrote, “It does not prohibit forced IUD insertions, forced subcutaneous implants, forced abortions, or forced sterilizations. It does not prohibit the widespread practice of detaining pregnant women, their husbands, or their other relatives to force them to submit to abortion, sterilization, or other unwanted procedures. It does not prohibit the killing of unauthorized infants by medical personnel at the time of delivery or within the next few days, a practice that has been reported in the international media several times in the past three years. It does not prohibit the use of torture to extract confessions or information from family planning violators, which has sometimes resulted in their death while in detention, as has also been documented in foreign press reports. Neither does it impose penalties on those who continue to use them. It does not prescribe penalties for cadres or officials who authorize, condone, or carry out such measures.” It was, in short, just another instrument to be used by the Chinese government in its relentless war on women and their children.
Aird Actively Helped
John Aird did more than merely criticize the one-child policy and its foreign supporters, however. He actively helped many hundreds — perhaps thousands — of victims of the policy to escape its clutches. Chinese women fleeing forced abortion or sterilization who applied for asylum in the U.S. could count on Mr. Aird’s support. He testified at, or submitted affidavits to, literally hundreds of asylum hearings as an expert witness on the enforcement of the one-child policy. His testimony before skeptical asylum judges often meant the difference between deportation hack to China, and permission to remain in the United States.
Even in the final weeks of his life, he continued to track the one-child policy, and to aid its victims and potential victims. Only days before his death, John remarked to me that, based on new evidence he had gathered from Beijing, the one-child policy was “as vigorously enforced now as it has ever been.”
John Aird stands remembered as one of the most selfless people I know, having given so much time free of charge to help hundreds of victims gain asylum and help us in our fight against coercion on China. May God have mercy on his soul.
1 John Aird, Slaughter of the Innocents (AEI Press, 1990), pp. 88–89.
3 J.S. Aird, “Family planning, human rights and the population establishment,” Population Research Institute 3 (5), 1993, pp. 4–5.
For more articles, click the first link in each drop-down menu, e.g. 2010 (v12).
- Weekly Briefing: Español
- La próxima batalla legislativa: el Proyecto de Ley sobre la toma de conciencia sobre el dolor
- ¿La legalización reduciría el aborto en América Latina?
- Las interrogantes de la demografía actual
- Informe de los Medios de Comunicación: Depo Provera es peligrosa para su salud.
- Canadá: una sorpresa ingrata
- Enfermeras dan el ejemplo: renuncian para no distribuir la Píldora del Día Siguiente a
- Ampliación de la Noticia: La desaparición del matrimonio
- Recordando a Reagan
- Population Research Institute expande su actividad; incorporándose en la fundación de
- Frenando la Expansión del HIV/SIDA mediante la Abstinencia (y la Doctrina Católica)
- Los Programas de Planificación Familiar de USAID merman los esfuerzos para frenar la promiscu
- Weekly Briefing: 2013 (v15)
- Controlling Women’s Desires in Kenya
- Why Do Filipino Women Die in Childbirth?
- Franchising Abortion and Sterilization
- Open response to: “Overpopulation: Should America have a one-child policy?
- What Does China Want?
- One Small Snip for Man, One Giant Snip for Mankind
- The End of America—as America
- Refugees Subject to Population Control
- Debunking the Myth of Overpopulation
- Contraception as a "Solution" to Abortion: No way!
- Cutting Foreign Aid to Save Lives
- A Crime in Time—and Again
- Catholic Relief Services Leaves Many Questions Unanswered
- Fundamental Reform Needed at Catholic Relief Services
- Madagascar Bishops and Clergy Complain about Catholic Relief Services' Activities
- Weekly Briefing: 2012 (v14)
- Will Russia Come Back to Life?
- China's one-child policy itself leads to forced abortions
- Why is Government (and Society) Discouraging Childbearing?
- UNICEF Should Rename Itself the United Nations Sex for Children Fund, or UNISEX
- America’s Pediatricians Claim the Right to Contracept Your Kids
- The Mirena IUD is Becoming More Popular - and the Lawsuits are Piling Up
- America's Depressed Birthrate
- Question: What Can we Expect From a Second Obama Administration on the Life Issues?
- Attending the Abortionists’ Annual Pep Rally
- Norplant is Back--Under a Different Name
- Sorry, Mr. Vice President, That Is Not a "Fact"
- Teenage Girl Becomes Infertile after Gardasil Vaccination
- The Contradiction of WHO
- Is Abortion Ever “Necessary?” The Evidence Says “No!”
- Of Mice and Men: New Study Touts a Male Contraceptive
- Weekly Briefing: 2011 (v13)
- Merry Christmas from PRI
- T-Shirts Are Available NOW!
- Catholic Health Care in Jeopardy
- Ban Sex Selective Abortions in the U.S.
- Pro-Life Amendment Defeated in Pro-Life Mississippi
- Baby Seven Billion, Welcome.
- Lies, Damned Lies, Statistics ... and Population Graphs
- Traditional Family Values
- We're In For A Scary Halloween (If You Listen to the Population Controllers)
- Take Good Care of Your Health Care Records - Or the Government Will!
- China's One-Child Policy Toll Reaches 400 Million
- Catholic Bishops Weigh Into Budget Debate
- Latest PRI Video Shows Collapse of Russia
- "Understanding" Joe Biden Perfects the Kowtow
- U.N. Climate Models Flawed - Grossly Exaggerate Warming Effect
- Weekly Briefing: 2010 (v12)
- Fourth Episode of Overpopulation Cartoon Series
- Turner Calls for Global One-Child Policy
- Love and HIV/AIDS
- Pope Benedict Misquoted on Condoms -- Again
- Planned Parenthood Wants to Abort Us into Prosperity
- As Elections Draw Near, PRI Releases Groundbreaking Video
- Does Obamacare Fund Abortion? Let Us Count the Ways.
- Islamic Terrorism and Fertility
- China's Thirty Years War Against its Own People Slated to Continue
- Time to Pay an "End-of-Life Visit" to ObamaCare
- PRI Updates Web Site, Releases New Video
- Radical Environmentalists Disclaim Responsibility for Eco-Terrorist James Lee
- A Farce: The UN's World Youth Conference
- After Passage of Pro-Abortion Constitution, Kenyan Bishops Urge Immediate Amendment
- The United Nations must love Catholics, we give them their best ideas.
- Weekly Briefing: 2009 (v11)
- In His Push for Socialized Medicine, Harry Reid Trashes the Hyde Amendment
- Global Warming Science? Nope, Global Warming Scam.
- Senator Max Baucus Wants to Teach Your Kids About Sex
- Blasted Ovaries: The Failure of Contraceptive Vaccines
- The Overpopulation Movement Struggles to Stay Relevant
- What's Next for the Pro-Life Movement in Health Care Reform?
- Sneak Attack on the Mexico City Policy
- Spain Awakens Against Abortion
- Merck Researcher Admits: Gardasil Guards Against Almost Nothing
- With 19 You Get Heaven
- Population Control to Combat Climate Change?
- Illegal Abortion Hot-Lines: A New Attack on the Unborn
- Obama to Seniors: Take Two Aspirin and Call Me When You're Dead
- Washington Feels the Wrath of Pro-Life Voters
- People Are The Enemy
- Weekly Briefing: 2008 (v10)
- Doug Kmiec's Departure from the Pro-Life Movement
- Abortion and Intolerance: Constants of the Left?
- The Huffington Post Gets It Wrong--Again
- China Frees Pregnant Mom after International Outcry
- Executive (Dis)Orders: Pro-life Policies Set to be Jettisoned
- Payback Time: What Planned Parenthood Expects from Obama
- Killing The Economy: Dennis Howard's "Elephant In The Living Room"
- How to Sell Out Your Country With Just One Word
- Is Immigration the Answer to the Current Economic Crisis?
- Wisconsin Offers "Free" Birth Control -- with Your Money
- USAID Denies Funding to Abortion Group Implicated in Forced Abortions and Sterilizations in China; PRI Applauds Action
- A New Front in the Abortion Wars
- Cyclebeads: The UNFPA Discovers Natural Family Planning, Sort Of
- Sarah Palin, An American Original
- "Kids: Your Time Is Up" -- Global Warming Game Targets Vulnerable Youngsters
- Weekly Briefing: 2007 (v09)
- Preserving Parental Rights in Panama
- Saving the Mexico City Policy
- How Family Planning Programs Cause Sex-Selective Abortion, Female Infanticide, and Other Forms of Ch
- Patrick Carroll's Research and the ABC Link Debate
- What Women Want (Hint: Not Reproductive Health Care)
- Fighting for Our Rights
- Reproductive Health Mortality
- House Democrats Stage Hearing on the Mexico City Policy
- Gender Equity and the Demeaning of Men's Issues
- The Obstetric Fistula Fallacy
- Chimeras, Great Britian, and the Brave New World
- Are There Too Many Columbians
- US Bishops Issue a New CALL to Latinos
- HillaryCare, 2.0
- HIV/AIDS: Western Failure and Ugandan Success
- Weekly Briefing: 2006 (v08)
- Irish Exceptionalism at an End?
- Suicide of the West?
- 300 Million and Immigration: Separating the Issues
- A Cut for Population Control Money?
- 300 Million, Social Security, and Solvency
- Pro-Life Politics
- The Small Problem of Suburban Sprawl
- Three Hundred Million and Counting
- Abortion the Cheap Easy Way
- Life in the News
- Restricting Women's Rights
- FDA Prepares Sell-Out on MAP
- Senate Democrats'Make-Believe on Girls' Abortions
- Kinder, Gentler Genocide in Mongolia
- World Population Aging 2006
- Weekly Briefing: 2005 (v07)
- What Mexican Women Want
- Will making pregnancy profitable save Italy from demographic destruction?
- House Takes an Interest in the RU-486 Poison Pill
- Getting U.S. Out of Abortion
- Time for a RU-486 Rollback
- A Feast for Life
- More Smiles for Scalito
- Abuse of Chinese Women and Children
- France's End
- Smiles for Scalito
- Abortion Doubters at the Washington Post?
- Mostly the Same, But UNFPA Discovers Fatherlessness
- UN AIDS Envoy Cant Stomach Abstinence
- Living the Gospel of Life Down Under
- Pro-Abortion Court Revolution Targets Colombia
- Weekly Briefing: 2004 (v06)
- Unlike Europe's, U.S. Population Continues to Grow--And in the Right Places
- Abortion by Other Means
- China's Persecution of Women and Children: More of the Same
- Canada Cuts off Chinese Women's Freedom in Order to Spite America's Face
- Would Legalization Reduce Abortion in Latin America?
- The Conscience Protection Amendment and NARAL's "D"
- The Abortion Pill Can Kill Mothers, Too
- Will Families Benefit from Tax Reform?
- The Unacceptable Arlen Specter
- How to Reduce the Number of Abortions (Hint:
- UNICEF: The Mask is Off!
- Secularism's Demographic Conundrum
- Despite Bumper Harvests, Lester Brown's Sky is Still Falling
- Peruvian Congress could punish prolife congressmen.
- Media Reports: Depo Provera Is Hazardous to your Health
- Weekly Briefing: 2003 (v05)
- Exposing Domestic Abortion Strategies
- New Revision Points to Underpopulation Crisis
- PRI needs your help for continued success in 2004
- The Coming Demographic Victory
- In Thanksgiving to God for People
- People: the Greatest Unmet Need
- Gates, Microsoft Urged by Shareholders to Cease Making Charitable Contributions
- President Bush Signs Partial Birth Abortion Ban Act of 2003
- The BBC's Method of HIV/AIDS Prevention
- Judge Robert Bork in Lincoln Nebraska
- USAID-funded FHI Exploits Women
- Population Control on our Shores
- The Two Sides of the Culture of Death
- Secretary Powell Cuts $25 Million More from UNFPA
- USAID Undercuts U.S. Global HIV/AIDS Initiative
- Weekly Briefing: 2002 (v04)
- Casting Lotts and Throwing Stones in the U.S. Congress
- Bush vs. Bangkok, Abortion as 'Reproductive Health'
- UK Pro-Aborts Seek to CHANGE Peruvian Health Policy
- UNFPA Seeks Drinking Friends to Fund Forced Abortion
- Condom Kingdom Deflated by Failure (Are You Listening, Bill?)
- USAID "Shifts" Focus to More Aggressive Population Policy for the Philippines
- Making "Reproductive Rights" (Read: Abortion) a Relic of the Past
- Broken Promises: Reproductive Rights Agenda Betrays Women and Children
- EU to Increase UNFPA Funding? Not so Fast!
- UNFPA Admits it Has No Way to Monitor China's Forced Abortion Population Program
- Graduating Countries from Population Control
- Foreign Aid in a Grown Up World
- ABOUT FACE: Norplant Victim Sues Wyeth, OBGYN for $120 Million
- How to Save Lives with $34 Million
- Project Afghanistan: A Situation Report
- Weekly Briefing: 2001 (v03)
- Urgent Action Alert! Call on President Bush to Zero-Fund UNFPA
- UNFPA Whitewashes Forced Abortion in China
- Hillary Clinton Forces Abortion Rights Agenda on Afghan Women
- Pro-Family Groups Condemn UNFPA
- Abortion Zealots Threaten Afghan Women
- Muslims Shocked by Western-led 'Genocide' in Refugee Camps
- UNFPA Hides Coercion Behind a Green Front
- An open letter from Steven W. Mosher to Thoraya Obaid, Executive Director of the United Nations Popu
- PRI Investigation of UNFPA Prompts Hearing on Forced Abortion in China
- UNFPA Supports Coercive Family Planning—Including Forced Abortion—In China (and PRI Has
- Abortion Group Targets Vulnerable Victims of Terror
- China's Role in Osama bin Laden's 'Holy War' On America
- America's Frozen Population
- What African Women Want (not "Reproductive Health Care")
- About Face
- Weekly Briefing: 2000 (v02)
- What the Abortion-Breast Cancer Link Means for Women in the Developing World
- Executive Orders to Save Lives
- Heedless of Demographic Dangers, Beijing Pushes Ahead with One-Child Policy
- Amend U.S. China Policy
- United in Opposing People
- RU 486 and Our Ties to China
- Abortion and Population Control
- Drowning Babies in Dollars
- AIDS and Population Control In Africa
- Family Planning Costs Lives
- Another Country
- Population Growth and its Enemies
- Immigration verus Population Control
- Land of the Setting Sun
- The Ordeal of Chinese Mothers Continues: New Evidence of Massive Female Infanticide
- Weekly Briefing: 1999 (v01)
- Planned Giving
- Depopulation Strikes New England
- Albright Scrambles to Appease Population Control Allies
- Wei Jingsheng Calls for Democracy in America
- UNFPA Bribes Kosovo Gynecologist
- Chinese Freedom Fighters to Meet at Historical Summit Conference
- Population Control and the New Global Racism
- Welcome Baby Six Billion!
- UNFPA Spokesman Lies About Milosevic Partnership to Preserve US Funding
- Know Your Rights!
- Feminist Rights Agenda Storms United Nations
- When Family Planning Is Ethnic Cleansing
- New York Post Faults UN Agency for Ethnic Cleansing of Albanians
- Reversing Itself, UNFPA Admits Ties to Milosevic Regime
- Disney Continues to Propagandize 'Myth of Overpopulation' in Public Schools