 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Section
1: Response to UK government policy
|
|
|
Response to UK government policy |
|
Responses we agree with: Tibet Vigil welcomes the fact that the UK:- "Is the only country that does not recognise Chinese sovereignty over Tibet" [Denis MacShane] "Believes that the Tibetans should have a greater say in running their own affairs" [Ben Bradshaw] "Takes every opportunity to press the Chinese to enter a dialogue with the Dalai Lama on a long term political solution in Tibet" [Denis MacShane] "Discusses human rights issues with the Chinese authorities in our regular high level human rights dialogue" [Jack Straw] "Raise a wide range of issues including individual cases such as that of Gedhun Choekyi Nyima, the Dalai Lama's choice as Panchen Lama. We also urged China to release a number of Tibetan dissidents". [Jack Straw] "Continue to urge the Chinese to ensure that demographic changes in Tibet brought about by the economic development in Western China, including Tibet, do not affect the Tibetan population adversely. This includes ensuring that they are the primary beneficiaries of economic growth, including new jobs and the provision of housing, health, and education facilities" [Ben Bradshaw] "Raises prison conditions in China in the UK-China human rights dialogue. We have encouraged the Chinese authorities to permit prison visits by the International Committee of The Red Cross" [Denis MacShane] "Receives the Dalai Lama as the spiritual leader of the Tibetan people" [F & CO] |
|
Responses we are ambivalent about: With regard to the UN resolutions on Tibet of 1959,1961,and 1965. Tibet Vigil welcomes the UK government view that:- "The essence of all three resolutions was a call for the human rights of the Tibetan people to be respected. We continue to press the Chinese on this." [Denis MacShane] However Tibet Vigil point out that the 1961 resolution called for "the cessation of practices which deprive the Tibetan people of their fundamental human rights and freedom including their rights to self determination" . Which the UK Government did sign up to. The fact that the UK representative stated that he was voting to "register disapproval at the violations of human rights not because of any change in our view of Tibet's status" [Denis MacShane] ignores the fact that this resolution supports the Tibetan right to self-determination. |
|
Responses we are disappointed with: Tibet Vigil is disappointed that the UK government:- "Does not recognise the Dalai Lama as head of state of the Tibetan people"[Denis MacShane] As the UK Government does not recognise Chinese sovereignty over Tibet it would seem to follow that the Dalai Lama or Tibetan Government In Exile must be considered as the political head of a Tibet regarded by the UK government as autonomous. "Won't be calling for the UN to give Tibetans refugee status as subjects of a state separate from China"[Denis MacShane] Regards "BP's investment in China as a matter for BP not the Government"[Denis MacShane] As the UK Government does not recognise Chinese sovereignty over Tibet, UK firms should not be permitted to invest in Tibet without the permission of the Tibetan Government In Exile. To do otherwise is to collaborate in the Chinese occupation of Tibet Has "no plans to urge the UN to call for a referendum in Tibet", [Denis MacShane] This refers to the proposal that the UN carry out a referendum of Tibetans in historical Tibet to ascertain their view on independence from, or inclusion within China. |
|
| Implications of the Government statement on Laogai :- "I should however point out that the International Labour Organisation [ILO] Convention on forced labour allows prisoners to work as long as they have been convicted by a court and are supervised by a public body not a private company" [Denis MacShane] Tibet Vigil totally rejects the implication that it is all right to import goods made by political prisoners if a court has convicted them. We also believe that this in direct contradiction with the Prison Made Goods Act. |
|
|
****************************************************************************** |
|
| Further comments by The UK Government to Tibet Vigil on: Birth Control Funding "Birth quotas in areas where the UN Population Fund is working have been abolished. UK assistance for UN agencies in China is aimed at promoting a better understanding of international standards in reproductive health. The UK does not support the one child policy" [Denis MacShane] It would be good news that the UN no longer funds a Chinese policy which in Tibet amounts to population control and genocide. However evidence from China (but not from Tibet) given by Dr Harry Wu to the US Senate on 17th Oct 2001 suggests that enforced abortions and sterilisations are continuing at Tianjin Hospital, a hospital funded by UN Children's Foundation just south of Beijing. |
|
| Selling Arms to China "The EU imposed a limited embargo on China in June 1989. The Government considers all applications to export defence equipment to China against our national interpretation of the EU embargo and against the consolidated UK and EU arms exporting licensing criteria. We do not approve the export of equipment where there is a clear risk that it might be used for international aggression or internal repression" [F&CO] Tibet Vigil considers that all exports of arms to China already contravene the Licensing Criteria and break the spirit of the Embargo. All arms sales to a country inevitably give a clear message of support to that country. How can arms dealing be considered as part of a process of dialogue professed to improve human rights? (See Appendix on Arms) |
|
| On Special Rapporteurs "UN Special Rapporteurs are independent. It is not for the British Government to tell them where to go"[Denis MacShane] Tibet Vigil comment that Special Rapporteurs are indeed independent but they receive their mandate to investigate by means of resolutions passed by the 53 member states of the UN Commission Of Human Rights of which the UK is a member. There the UK can use its influence to urge China to receive Special Rapporteurs' visits. |
|
On UK demonstrations "The policing of demonstrations is a matter for the police" [Denis MacShane] Tibet Vigil agrees that this should be the case but believes that there have been instances of government influence over policing of pro Tibet demonstrations. It is also our perception that the UK government wishes to keep such demonstrations to a minimum. We feel that this shows the government is prepared to jeopardise our democratic rights to accommodate an oppressive and undemocratic regime. |
|