Posted on 05/12/2005 3:00:03 AM PDT by Dr. Marten
Tiananmen inmates linked to EU arms embargo
Jonathan Watts in Beijing
Thursday May 12, 2005
The Guardian
China should release those of its citizens imprisoned since the 1989 Tiananmen Square crackdown if it wants the European Union to end its arms ban, a senior EU delegation told their hosts in Beijing yesterday.
The request for an amnesty, one of four areas in which the EU is seeking better human rights, raises the bar for lifting the 16-year embargo, making a change unlikely this year.
The linkage is embarrassing for Beijing's communist leaders, who sees removal of the "discriminatory" ban as a central goal of its improved relations with Europe. It is also a setback for the French president, Jacques Chirac, and the German chancellor, Gerhard Schröder, who have pushed hard for a June date for the 25-state union to lift its ban, imposed after 1989's bloody suppression of demonstrations for democracy.
According to a European diplomat taking part in the negotiations, the EU has urged Beijing to ratify the UN convention on political and civil rights; release Tiananmen prisoners; reform China's re-education-through-labour penal system; and ease media censorship.
Although not described as preconditions, the very public linkage creates a stumbling block. Accepting the four proposals would cost Beijing a huge loss of face. The foreign minister, Li Zhaoxing, said it was "unreasonable and unhelpful" to link the embargo to China's rights record.
"Any attempt to impose one's own values on another country is an embodiment of disrespect to the human rights of the other country," he told a joint news conference with his EU counterpart. Chinese officials argue that the ban is a cold war relic, and fails to take account of dramatic changes since 1989.
But Beijing has made no effort to address what caused the ban - the breaking up of the Tiananmen demonstrations on June 4 1989 by troops and tanks of the People's Liberation army who killed hundreds, possibly thousands, of protesters. There has been no public inquiry or punishment of those responsible. Instead, senior leaders insist the crackdown was necessary to quell a revolt.
Although human rights was the reason for the ban in the first place, the question is only belatedly becoming part of the discussion about lifting it. Germany and France favour ending the embargo because they seek closer ties with China to increase trade and offset the global power of the US. Washington and Tokyo oppose lifting of the ban because they fear sales of EU technology could tip the strategic balance in Asia.
Taiwan is a particular concern. China has built up its forces near the island, which Beijing considers a rogue province. In March, the National People's Congress, China's parliament, passed an "anti-secession" law giving a legal basis for the use of force should Taiwan attempt to declare independence.
Mr Ferrero-Waldner said the timing of the enactment had upset EU plans to lift the ban by June. "Certainly the anti-secession law has not been helpful with regard to the question of lifting the arms embargo. Again, it's about the right climate," he said.
After June, the UK will take the EU's six-month rotating presidency. Given its close political relationship with the US, Britain is thought unwilling to have the arms embargo lifted on its watch.
On last year's Tiananmen anniversary, Amnesty International said it had records of more than 50 people it believed were still imprisoned (down from 241 it listed in 1999), "a fraction of the true figure, which has never been released by the authorities".
Of course there's a catch to this too. If nobody knows just how many protestors were actually imprisoned, how are we supposed to know if Beijing released them or not?
China Ping.
Sorry, but this is just so much hot air.
Make a demand you KNOW the other side can't accept, then back off it so that the other side "wins" a victory at the negotiating table.
The EU is DETERMINED to push this through, and they will.
Nevertheless, this is at least a bit of good news.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.