An activist who has testified before Congress, issued warnings to the United Nations and created programs that battle the Chinese government’s force abortions is praising President Trump for stopping U.S. funding of a U.N. program that supports the communist nation’s policy.
The forced abortions continue, Reggie Littlejohn, founder and president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, has confirmed, under China’s “two-child” policy instead of its original one-child limit.
The Trump administration, which took a pro-life stance in the 2016 presidential campaign, now has announced through the State Department it is ending funding for the U.N.’s Population Fund, the agency that funds forced abortions in China and addresses similar issues in other nations.
In a letter to U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, the agency announced it would no longer send U.S. taxpayer money to the UNFPA because of its support for “the management of … a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.”
It’s the first move under Trump to cut funding for the U.N., which he’s already targeted as largely being an unnecessary cost for the U.S.
“We are thrilled that the U.S. is no longer funding forced abortion and involuntary sterilization in China,” Littlejohn said. “The blood of Chinese women and babies is no longer on our hands. My very first press release, in 2009, was entitled ‘You Are Funding Forced Abortions in China.’ I have consistently advocated for the defunding of UNFPA over the years, most recently just a couple of weeks ago at the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women.”
Her campaign made little headway under ex-President Obama because of his ardent support for abortion at any time and at taxpayer expense.
As a state senator in Illinois, Obama even opposed requiring doctors to offer emergency help to infants who survive an abortion procedure.
Littlejohn said her message at the UNCSW was that the secretary of state “should investigate and evaluate UNFPA’s activities in China, and the president should de-fund them under the Kemp-Kasten Amendment, which ‘prohibits funding for any organization or program that, as determined by the president, supports or participates in the management of a program of coercive abortion or involuntary sterilization.'”
“The UNFPA clearly supports China’s population control program, which they know is coercive,” she said. “Under China’s one (now two) child policy, women have been forcibly aborted up to the ninth month of pregnancy. Some of these forced abortions have been so violent that the women themselves have died, along with their full term babies. There have been brutal forced sterilizations as well, butchering women and leaving them disabled. Where was the outcry from the UNFPA? In my opinion, silence in the face of such atrocities is complicity. Dr. Martin Luther King once said, ‘In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends.’ The UNFPA’s silence in the face of decades of forced abortion has been a sword in the wombs of millions of women and babies of China. I rejoice with them that the foot of the UNFPA is finally off of their necks.”
While the U.N. agency has denied being complicit, there is no question it has been involved in coercive population control programs in China.
According to a Washington Times report, Littlejohn noted, UNFPA’s former head, Dr. Nafis Sadik, was awarded the Population Prize Award by the Chinese State Family Planning Commission in 2002.
In accepting the award, Sadik said, “Looking back, I feel a great sense of pride for the Chinese government and people for their support to UNFPA and to me, personally, I also feel proud that UNFPA made the wise decision to resist external pressures and continued its fruitful cooperation with China.”
The Trump administration already had restored the Mexico City Policy, which prevents U.S. funding for international groups in the abortion business.
The UNFPA claimed in a website statement that it doesn’t support coercive abortion programs in China.
The agency received $75 million from U.S. taxpayers in 2015.
Just months ago, she highlighted how Hillary Clinton was spreading fake news about China’s abortion practices during the 2016 presidential race.
Littlejohn had just recently filed a complaint over China’s forced abortions with the U.N. when Clinton claimed in a presidential debate the fight was over.
“I’ve been to countries where governments either forced women to have abortions, like they used to do in China,” Clinton claimed at the time.
But Littlejohn insisted that while China eased its one-child policy, it still practices forced abortion after a couple has two children.
“With all her experience as former secretary of state, it is untrue and deeply disappointing for Hillary Clinton to put the Chinese government’s practice of forced abortion in the past. If she thinks that China no longer forces women to abort babies, she should explain that to a couple, surnamed Zhong, who in August of this year were forced to choose between an abortion at eight months or the loss of both of their government jobs. Or she should inform He Liping, who was forced either to pay an impossible ‘terror fine’ of $39,000 or face abortion at six months,” she charged at the time.
See Clinton’s comment:
Littlejohn continued, “Or perhaps she should read the May 4, 2016, BBC article entitled ‘Reinventing China’s Abortion Police,’ which discusses a small collaborative project by Stanford University and Shaanxi Normal University to repurpose 69 Family Planning Officials – apparently on the assumption that they are no longer needed now that China has moved to a two-child policy.
“The article follows one Family Planning Official, Li Bo, who has been ‘reinvented’ from ‘hunt[ing] down families suspected of violating the country’s draconian rules on how many children couples can have’ into a rubber duckie squeezing, nursery rhyme singing ‘Chinese Father Christmas,’ complete with ‘a bag full of toys and picture books.’
“Has his job really been ‘reinvented,’ or is he really a member of the womb police, masquerading as ‘Chinese Father Christmas’ – the new face of China’s Family Planning Police? Buried deep in the article is the following account of the dark side of Li Bo’s job – an important piece of original reporting by the BBC,” Littlejohn said.
She quoted the pertinent section of the BBC report:
Since the start of 2016, all Chinese couples have been allowed two children. But they can have no more than that unless they are from ethnic minorities – so Li Bo still spends some of his time working as a birth-control enforcer. In the town’s health clinic he is busy screening local women. All women of childbearing age have check-ups four times a year to ensure they’re healthy . . . and to see if they are pregnant. . . But Li is also a loyal Communist party official who believes the state knows best and society’s needs are greater than those of individuals. So he is matter-of-fact about the unpleasant task of telling women who couldn’t afford the fine to terminate their pregnancies. ‘People didn’t swear at us but they probably did behind our backs,’ he says. ‘It’s natural because we were carrying out the law and they were breaking it so it is just like the clash between a policeman and a thief.’ He adds that as long as restrictions are in place, such clashes will continue.
The proof, Littlejohn said, is in the report about “a Chinese Communist Family Planning Official.”
It states: “It is still illegal for single women to have babies in China, and for couples to have third children. It appears that some may be given an opportunity to pay a fine, but Li Bo tells ‘those who couldn’t afford the fine to terminate their pregnancies.’ In other words, if a woman is illegally pregnant and cannot pay the fine – which can be as much as ten times her annual salary – she is forced to abort. Forced abortion, therefore, continues under the Two-Child Policy.”
Littlejohn’s organization has set up an online petition on the issue and has created a video about “China’s War on Women.”
See the video:
WRWF also operates a “Save a Girl” campaign supporting mothers of girls facing financial hardship by raising the child.