Select Committee on Foreign Affairs Minutes of Evidence


Examination of Witnesses (Questions 60-66)

MS KATE ALLEN, MR TIM HANCOCK AND MR STEVE CRAWSHAW

21 DECEMBER 2004

  Q60 Andrew Mackinlay: So must the British Government.

  Mr Hancock: Absolutely.

  Q61 Andrew Mackinlay: So what sort of response do you look for from the British?

  Mr Hancock: I do not know whether these individual cases have been raised or not by the UK. I must say that in quite a number of cases the UK has a reasonable record of démarche in the case of death sentences, so it would not surprise me if they have raised these cases. I hope they have.

  Q62 Andrew Mackinlay: On that it seems to me that we ought to think about how we can have a triggering mechanism, both as a Committee and as   Parliament to know that we can make representations to whoever rather than just pressure groups. I am thinking aloud here but it is something our colleagues might think about when we come to the report. On China I notice that the Foreign Office's report gives some genuflection to religious persecution. It refers to continuing harassment of the adherents of the Falun Gong spiritual movement. I read it and read it again because it seemed to me that the authors of this had carefully crafted it in that the illustration again was Falun Gong, but they avoided, for instance, referring to the Christian religions because it would have a resonance back here. Am I not correct that there are these house churches, which I think are mainly of the Protestant faith, the Catholic church is not part of the patriotic association, and many other faiths continue to have widespread persecution in China in the full knowledge of all concerned in the central government as well as regional governments and the United Kingdom Government demonstrated, as illustrated by this report, that they wanted to sweep it under the carpet? What would you like to say about that?

  Ms Allen: Simply that our research and knowledge in terms of China includes the Falun Gong in terms of political harassment and targeting it; it also includes Christian groups and it also includes religious minorities, in Xinjiang the Muslim community, and in Tibet. There are few religions that are exempt from this crackdown by the Chinese authorities.

  Q63 Andrew Mackinlay: But what is the United Kingdom Government's response from what you observe to the extent that they make representations about this? Again, it goes back to the continuing theme throughout this afternoon, which is balancing, as we must, the wider commercial and political and strategic interests with all these dictatorships. I wonder if you feel that enough is being done in respect of these groups and also whether or not they are hiding it? I am not referring to the persecution of Christian groups which, as I say, rightly or wrongly would have a greater resonance here perhaps.

  Ms Allen: I think that would be a good question for the minister when you see him in January. What we are very much aware of is that the UK/China human rights dialogue is entering its 11th round and I guess that our issue would be to want the UK Government to be clear what it thinks it is getting out of that dialogue and what are the moves in terms of human rights issues and real improvements in terms of China and its own government's record in terms of human rights that are coming from that dialogue.

  Mr Crawshaw: I would agree with that. We are not against the dialogue as such but it does need to be seen to be making progress. I think the British Government is mindful of that. You are right, of course. Everything you have described in terms of religious persecution is absolutely accurate. One could make a case, and as you said the minister can respond himself, but I think there may be a concern for the British Government that precisely raising the Christian ones appears to be too much focused on one's own concerns and that one may have better traction, if you like, and more effect by saying, "This is nothing to do with me any more, where I come from where there is a Christian church, but in broad terms, with clearly the repression of political freedom of expression and of religious freedom of expression is still very serious". Just as a postscript to that, looking at the European Union and the possibility of the lifting of an arms embargo, it is extraordinary that their business does indeed come in and it is most dismaying that there is the possibility of lifting that without further ado fundamentally for commercial reasons.

  Q64 Andrew Mackinlay: My third and final question is on Uzbekistan. It is in the public domain that we do not now have an ambassador in Uzbekistan and we need not go into that, but has there been any diminution in the United Kingdom's capacity to monitor, to make representations, as we speak today by the hiatus in our diplomatic representation? Has it been a setback? Can you throw any light on this? I am not talking about individual circumstances; that is not our remit, but it does seem to me that here is a very important country which you referred to earlier where I am a bit concerned that our man or woman is not there today.

  Mr Crawshaw: The British Government has repeatedly said that the changes involving the ambassador in no way detract from the fact that the British Government remains with a very strong policy on the repressive regime in Uzbekistan. I hope that is true and I know that the embassy is doing some very valuable work. Our office in Tashkent, which you will not be surprised to hear, has not always had the easiest of relationships with the Uzbek government and the British Government has been helpful in that regard. I would point, as I did in my submission, to the fact that there is a design sometimes which again suggests that the US administration is equally tough, which is simply incorrect. In the human rights report it talks about the $18 million of aid which has been withdrawn. It does not mention the $21 million that was then given back and a little bit more by the Pentagon. I think it is misleading to suggest that the most powerful government, and clearly the US government is the most powerful foreign government in terms of Uzbekistan issues, is not doing anything. I hope the British Embassy will take a very strong role. Certainly it is right to say that this situation has in no way got better in Uzbekistan.

  Q65 Sir John Stanley: It is impossible to cover all the countries that we are concerned about and I know that your organisations are concerned about and for the record I hope that those fighting for human rights, which are too many to mention to cover in this two-hour session today, do not in any way feel that their battles and their work are under-appreciated by this Committee. I would just like to finish with Burma. I was myself going to describe the British Government's policy and indeed the EU policy as one of mild pressure. The question I would like to ask your organisations is, do you think that mild pressure is the right policy in terms of trying to get human rights progress from the Burma generals or do you think we should be adopting a tougher pressure policy or would a tougher pressure policy be counter-productive? If you think that a tougher pressure policy would be a better policy what form do you think the tougher pressure should take?

  Ms Allen: We agree with the FCO's assessment that the human rights situation in Burma has not improved substantially and that the minor steps in the right direction have been offset by further repression of the main opposition party. I think it may well be time to think about further concerted action.

  Q66 Sir John Stanley: What form should that more concerted action take?

  Ms Allen: I think perhaps with the EU, and perhaps while the UK Government has the EU Presidency, raising this issue more.

  Mr Crawshaw: Obviously, through ASEAN there has been something which has been partly tried and so far very ineffectively there is the EU/US relationship. I do not think there are easy solutions there. I would not suggest that by ratcheting up indefinitely we would get exactly the desired outcome. I do think that more pressure needs to be brought to bear, I would think through the EU and indirectly therefore through ASEAN and isolation of the leadership. Clearly things are not going in the right direction at the moment.

  Chairman: Ms Allen, Mr Hancock, Mr Crawshaw, this may well be the last occasion in this Parliament when the Foreign Affairs Committee will turn to you for advice, but may I thank you for the help you have given over the Parliament as a whole. May I wish you, and indeed my colleagues and the room as a whole, a very happy Christmas and New Year. Thank you all very much.





 
previous page contents next page

House of Commons home page Parliament home page House of Lords home page search page enquiries index

© Parliamentary copyright 2005
Prepared 26 March 2005