Commentary

With the new EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs a new strategy on human rights in Tibet is needed!

Federica Mogherini

Federica Mogherini, High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission designate.

On 22 October 2014, the European Parliament, after having undertaken formal hearings with all Commissioner-designates, voted on the new European Commission, led by its President Jean-Claude Juncker, and approved the 27 candidates. The new High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Vice-President of the European Commission will be Mrs. Federica Mogherini, Italy’s former Foreign Affairs Minister. She assumes her new position on 1 November, 2014.

Her appointment was the outcome of a long and difficult negotiation process between the European Council and President Juncker. Mrs. Mogherini emerged as a frontrunner for the post early on in the process but had been in the center of heated debates between Member States. In fact, several Eastern European Member States, such as the Baltic States, Poland and Bulgaria, were strongly opposed to her candidature, as she was deemed too Russia-friendly, and threatened to block her appointment. Moreover, many expressed concerns that, at a time of serious challenges and international crises, a candidate with a stronger background would have been more appropriate, as she lacked foreign policy experience, having been in her position only since January.

Therefore, Mrs. Mogherini assumes her new office with the challenge to prove that her commitment to the fundamental European values of freedom, democracy and respect for human rights is unwavering.

We at the International Campaign for Tibet have expressed our readiness to work closely with the new High Representative and have called on Mrs. Mogherini to ensure that human rights are included at every level of EU-China relations.

During her hearing at the European Parliament on 6 October, Mrs. Mogherini stressed her commitment to the promotion of human rights throughout all areas of her work, defining it as the “core business” and a precondition for stability. On that occasion, she also clearly stated that a reassessment of the EU’s relationship with Russia was needed by combining a “mix of assertiveness and diplomacy.”

She did not specifically refer to China and Tibet in her speech and focused more strongly on the ongoing political and humanitarian crises around the world. However, she pointed out that she attached great importance to the rights of ethnic minorities and would work on the prevention of discrimination against them.

We welcome Mrs. Mogherini’s strong human rights language, which makes us hope for a greater collaboration in the next five years.

Mrs. Mogherini has had a Tibet connection. During her time as a Member of the Italian Parliament she has met with the Dalai Lama and participated in the World Parliamentarians’ Convention on Tibet held in Rome in 2009. She has also met with representatives of the Tibetan leadership, including the Sikyong, Dr. Lobsang Sangay.

In recent years we have witnessed a disappointing, systematic downgrading of human rights issues in the EU’s foreign policy. Under Catherine Ashton’s leadership, human rights in the EU’s external action have been reduced to mere, occasional and rhetorical statements. On China specifically, we have often highlighted the lack of concrete progress of the EU-China human rights dialogue, which has failed to deliver improvements on the ground, and regret the fact that the Chinese government was able to reduce the rounds of this dialogue from two to one per year.

We hope that with a new High Representative, the EU will reinvigorate its human rights work and drift away from the worrying double standards it has adopted, and stop condemning human rights violations only in smaller and less strategically interesting third countries, while turning a blind eye towards powerful, strategic partners such as China.

It is urgently needed that the EU rethinks its human rights strategy and adopts a coherent and unified approach towards human rights issues in China and Tibet. This is necessary not only for the EU’s own credibility, but because this is its duty, according to the EU Treaties. We believe that securing human rights anywhere in the world will ultimately bring stability also to the EU and European citizens.

Mrs. Mogherini needs to prioritize this matter at the very beginning of her mandate and use all her exchanges with the Chinese leadership to reinforce the message that the current situation in Tibet is unacceptable for stable EU-China relations.

Only this way she will be able to bring the EU back to its role of human rights champion and promoter, and leave the current image of a weak and divided EU behind.

“United in diversity” is the motto, which the EU has proudly given to itself. It is time that this does not simply remain a slogan. It is time that the EU really starts acting as a strong, united and global actor for human rights and peace.

Progress in China’s Human Rights in 2013… according to the Chinese Government

As it happens to many governments, there is a moment in the year when the Chinese Government presents an overall picture of the human rights situation in the country, and we at ICT are naturally interested in reading it, especially about Tibet. This year it happened last week.

What is peculiar about China is that while (democratic) governments present their annual human rights reports trying to be accurate and objective, China’s authorities continue to embrace propaganda starting from its title — “White Paper: Progress in China’s human rights in 2013” — not even contemplating that “progress” might not happen concerning the respect of human rights. What is striking is that despite the dire situations in Tibet and Xinjiang, there is not even the slightest recognition by the Chinese of the vast human rights violations that continue to happen.

A blog is not the place to make a systematic analysis of the claims presented in the White Paper, but while I encourage you to read it yourself. I wish to draw your attention to a few sentences.

In the chapter about the “Rights of ethnic minorities” all the paragraphs begin with celebratory remarks. A few examples:

“China has established the principle that all ethnic groups are equal and jointly participate in the management of state affairs on the constitutional, legal and systemic levels.”

“The political rights of ethnic minorities are fully guaranteed.”

“The socioeconomic rights of ethnic minorities are fully protected.”

“The cultural legacies of Tibet are effectively protected, and the local religion and traditional customs and social mores are respected.”

For a country that aspires to be accepted as an important and reliable international power, China clearly needs to make a lot of progress and democratic governments should never accept unreliable and unconfirmed information from it. We at ICT have a solution: if China thinks that the reality of the human rights situation in Tibet is such, it can prove it by inviting UN experts and human rights NGOs to Tibet to see it for themselves.

Matteo
Matteo

The “enjoyment” of social and economic rights of Tibetans

The people of my generation were just teenagers when the Berlin wall fell and the demise of the social and political system built around the Soviet Union took place.

I knew very little about politics and the world at the time, but that little was enough to remember Communist propaganda that was sometimes mentioned on TV celebrating a happy and florid land (images of beautiful Red Square on Moscow were in display) where people where not interested in “western freedoms,” but instead enjoyed “real equality”. After all, I was born in Italy, a country that had the biggest Communist party of western Europe, so I had some easy access to that propaganda.

When in 1989, I saw the images of the people of Berlin celebrating the fall of the Soviet system, it was clear to me who was lying and who was telling the truth.

Today, China, although still formally ruled by the Communist Party, is far different from the Soviet Union. Decades ago it decided to wholeheartedly embrace capitalism; a decision that has led to significant economic growth over the last 15 years.

What is not too different from the communist systems is the propaganda about justice and equality; has capitalism, without freedom and the rule of law – brought equality, in particular in Tibet, as the Chinese government claims?

Last week, ICT challenged China’s assertion that Tibetans enjoy equal social and economic rights and we did it in the place where all countries of the world are, in theory, supposed to be accountable for the respect of basic human rights.

ICT Germany’s Executive Director Kai Muller took the floor at the United Nations in Geneva and gave a clear testimony before the UN Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights that was reviewing China’s record.

You can read Kai’s testimony here. His case was particularly compelling regarding the forced relocation of Tibetan nomads, the denial of the right to education for Tibetan children and the control on religious freedom in Tibet.

Matteo
Matteo

Fang Lizhi was right about Tibet and China

On April 6, 2012, a prominent Chinese democracy advocate and noted thinker, Fang Lizhi, passed away in Tucson, AZ. He was forced to flee to the United States in 1989 in the wake of the Chinese authorities’ clampdown on the democracy movement in China.

In addition to his well-known effort on democracy and freedom for China, he was also a Chinese intellectual who had a good grasp of the nature of the Tibetan problem. One of his ways of indicating his concern for the plight of the Tibetan people was by serving on the international council of advisors of the International Campaign for Tibet.

In 1991, a few years after he came to the United States, Fang addressed a conference, most probably the first-ever dialogue between Chinese and Tibetans, on the issue of Tibet in New York. What he said then holds true even now.

There are some Chinese people who tend to hold the view that Tibetans may have suffered under the present regime, but so have the Chinese people. Fang had this to say on the issue. “Tibet has suffered much during the years of Chinese Communist Party rule, as has all of the People’s Republic of China. But Tibet’s cultural and religious life has been more severely attacked by the Communist Party than the traditions of the Han culture. Still, Tibetan culture has managed to survive; it seems to have great resilience.”

On the question whether a democratic China may be better off for the people of Tibet, Fang said, “We all want democracy. But will democracy make interaction among various social groups more harmonious, or less? A change toward genuine democratization is a necessary condition for such harmony, but it is not a sufficient condition in itself. In other words, we need both democracy and human rights if we are to find a way to live together peacefully, but something more is needed.”

He went on the expand on this “something more” that was needed by talking about the Chinese authorities’ discriminatory policies against non-Chinese people. Fang said, “The Chinese Communist Party has always suppressed nationalistic feelings among the ethnic groups that make the People’s Republic of China. Han nationalism is considered to be fine, but minority nationalism is labeled “splittism” and “counterrevolutionary.” Just as in Eastern Europe and in the Soviet Union in past decades, communism has driven nationalisms underground. The Communist Party’s solution to the problem of the various minorities is to cover up their sense of uniqueness, to forbid any expression of nationalism. This, in the long term, is no solution at all. As long as the one-party rule of the Communist Party lasts, ethnic conflict will continue.”

If we look at the Chinese authorities repressive policies on Tibetans, we can see that what Fang mentions is something that has not merely happened, but continues to happen, to the Tibetan people today.

Fang, nevertheless, promotes dialogue as a way to resolve conflicts. In a way of encouraging both Tibetans and Chinese to understand each other better and to create trust and confidence, he said, “I think we must not retreat into our separate corners and stare at each other suspiciously from a distance. We must create an environment in which we can continue to talk through the problems that come up and find solutions to them, rather than allowing them to fester. We must find universal standards that bring us together in agreement and fellowship.”

I have never met Prof. Fang Lizhi, but just as those many Chinese people who have been inspired by his words and action, I believe that his position on the issue of Tibet is something that is increasingly felt by Chinese intellectuals who truly care about the future of China. As such, he is also an inspiration for me.