APPENDIX 10
Memorandum submitted by the Free Tibet
Campaign
Free Tibet Campaign stands for the Tibetans'
right to decide their own future. It campaigns for an end to the
Chinese occupation of Tibet and for the Tibetans' fundamental
human rights to be respected. It is independent of all governments
and is funded by its members and supporters. The following submission
looks solely at the section of the Human Rights Annual Report
that relates to China. It comments the language used and challenges
some of the assertions made. The attached appendix gives some
examples of how human rights in Tibet have deteriorated since
the publication of the 1998 Human Rights Annual Report.
1. There is no mention of Tibet in the section
on China, nor in the rest of the report, despite the Government's
apparent concern about the recent deterioration of the situation
there (see appendix) and its stated policy on Tibet, which "regards
Tibet as autonomous."
2. There is ample evidence that the human
rights dialogue has not only failed to produce improvements in
China and Tibet, but has failed to prevent the deterioration there.
China has not justified the faith of the Government in the human
rights dialogue by attempting to give even the appearance of a
willingness to change. For example, the China Daily said in October
1998 "It is not that China's stance or policies on the issue
of human rights have changed . . . rather that the belated favourable
turn in the international atmosphere has created an opportunity
for China to elaborate its perspectives". Free Tibet Campaign
is of the opinion that, with Britain and the EU's failure to promote
or support any resolutions at the United Nations Commission for
Human Rights in 1998 and 1999, China will feel justified in continuing
its crackdown. China has effectively blackmailed western governments
by threatening to withdraw from human rights dialogues should
there be any renewal of the use of resolutions at the UN Commision
for Human Rights. Quiet diplomacy has likewise failed. In October
1998, the Prime Minsiter quietly and diplomatically raised the
case of detained democracy activist Xu Wenli. Within a matter
of weeks, Xu had been sentenced to 13 years in jail.
3. The report states "We do not pull
our punches in expressing our concerns to the Chinese authorities".
It is Free Tibet Campaign's opinion that this is an exaggeration
of the truth; in fact the Government has re-stated its commitment
to quiet diplomacy, and we would like to see evidence of the kind
of "tough talk" which this statement implies. Moreover,
this statement suggests that no punches are pulled in discussions
with the Chinese authorities. There is no evidence that such frankness
is used in ministerial contact. In October 1998, during his visit
to China, the Prime Minister repeatedly failed to take opportunities
to raise concerns about human rights and Tibet publicly. During
the State Visit of Jian Zemin, human rights occupied only 10 minutes
of the Prime Minister's meeting with Jiang, with the Chinese President
the first to raise it.
4. The report suggests that the only concerns
about human rights in China are about the suppression of political
dissent and that greater social and economic freedom exists. This
is not the case; in reference only to Tibet, an increase in controls
over many aspects of daily life is disempowering and angering
ordinary Tibetan people. These include:
— Economic policies (arbitrary taxation
of Tibetans, fencing of nomadic lands and forced settling of nomads,
economic discrimination in favour of Han settlers)
— Control of religion (patriotic re-education
extended from monasteries to schools, the anti Dalai Lama campaign
broadened and the imposition of a government-selected Panchen
Lama).
— Social impacts of Sinicisation (loss
of traditional Tibetan culture, introduction of prostitution and
alcoholism and the marginalisation of Tibetans as a result of
the high cost of education/restrictions on education in the Tibetan
language.
|
