|
I had a second meeting at the Foreign Office , this time with Caroline
Rowett ,China/Hong Kong Department, freshly returned from the bilateral
talks in China. [accompanied by Alison Banks] The body of our meeting
was taken up with 6 questions I had sent in ahead of the meeting
Q :-- As the UK Government does not recognise Chinese sovereignty
over Tibet it would seem to follow that the Dalai Lama and the Tibetan
Government In Exile must be considered as the political leaders
of a Tibet regarded by the UK Government as autonomous. How can
the government justify the fact therefore that it does not recognise
[or receive on visits to the UK] those leaders as political leaders
?
A:--[Paraphrase] The UK Government does not recognise Tibet as Independent,
and recognises the special relationship of China with Tibet, so
would not recognise Tibetan leaders in exile as political leaders.
Q:-As the UK Government does not recognise Chinese sovereignty over
Tibet surely the UK Government should not allow UK firms to invest
in Tibet without the permission of the Tibetan Government In Exile
?
A:--That's not the sort of thing Government does . Well possibly
you are right and Government does seek trade embargos as in Zimbabwe
occasionally, so theoretically the Gov could ask firms to consult
the Tibetan Gov In Exile, but what other country has done so ?
Q:--If the UK Government does not put trade before human rights
what signals does the UK Government think it gives China if arms
exports to China are increased [especially as the exports appear
to be against our own licensing criteria and against the spirit
of the European Embargo] and if UK firms are allowed to collaborate
in China's exploitation of Tibetan resources.
A:- I did not get a direct reply on this because the Foreign Office
disagreed with me that the exports are going up though that's what
the official figures show. We also disagreed with my view that as
the PLA are occupying Tibet any supply of arms or arms components
aids that occupation, either aiding internal repression or regional
disquiet, both against the licensing criteria. Caroline did not
agree that the PLA are occupying Tibet, but seemed to find it hard
to reiterate this official line. When I pointed out that it is because
of the force represented by the PLA that the Dalai Lama is in exile,
she seemed to suggest I had it wrong and that there were other reasons
he was in exile. But she failed to think of any. During the discussion
of these first three points I also raised the question of talks
between the Foreign Office and the Dalai Lama's representative in
the UK, as this is relevant to the political status. It became apparent
that they do meet, but as far as I could tell, I don't think that
the Tibetan Government In Exile's Guidelines For Sustainable Investment
In Tibet had ever been raised . It is these Guidelines that request
firms to consult the TGIE before investing in Tibet.
Q:-Will the UK Government urge the EU to develop a system for verifying
the origin of goods from China, to prevent laogai made goods being
imported ?
A:-- [paraphrase] No. We agree that it is against the Prison Made
Goods Act to import such goods but we don't know which goods come
from the camps. If you suspect any goods as being laogai made then
please inform Customs and Excise. [ Caroline Rowett did agree that
we now know the origin of every cow in Europe, but was unaware that
we now have a Holocaust remembrance day which I felt must show our
intention never to support oppressive camps ]
Q:- Will the Foreign Office inform us, Tibet Vigil, of the itineraries
of visiting Chinese ministers, in the same way as the Press are
informed so that we may exercise our right to peacefully demonstrate
A:--[paraphrase] No. Security reasons.
Q:-- How informed is the Foreign Office of the relevance of the
UN Special Rapporteur For Indigenous Peoples on Tibet ? [Given that
this is the International decade of the World's Indigenous People
[1994-2004] one of whose aims is the adoption of the UN Declaration
Of The Rights of Indigenous Peoples by 2004]
A:--[paraphrase] Following your question we have made ourselves
more aware on this issue. As with such things progress in the UN
is very slow, and a definition of Indigenous People has hardly been
reached. But we will keep informed of any progress.
Sometime during our meeting we also got onto the topic of Independence
with me explaining to Caroline the different positions of UK groups
on the subject and the View of the Tibetan Government In Exile on
it.
We also discussed birth control. I expressed the Vigil view that
all birth control in an occupied country is genocide and that even
if penalties in rural areas for having larger families are rarely
implemented that did not mean that fear of the penalties did not
coerce the majority into compliance. I drew the analogy of the cannabis
laws in the UK. Although it has been let known that people will
not be prosecuted that does not mean that the average person will
go down the road to score. The average person would not smoke unless
it was legal. In the same way unless the penalties in Tibet are
removed one cannot tell what percentage are intimidated by them.
However on top of that we don't really know what's going on ,we
don't know the truth about continuing enforced sterilisations and
abortions ,although there is no recent evidence of UN involvement
in Tibet in that.
As I left I informed Caroline that I would probably be resigning
soon as someone younger is needed. She asked that I keep her informed
of my successor[s]
--simon
P.S. As a result of this meeting Tibet Vigil has now received replies
to all the Joint Policy and the Statement to the UK Government of
Feb 18th.
|
