CHINA, HUMAN RIGHTS AND INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS.

The E.U. Arms Embargo. A case study.

The Structure

Role of Human rights in international relations A brief history of human rights (and their

violations) in china between 1949-1989. Movement leading up to the event in the 80s. China’s relationship with EU. A brief history. The event and its coverage in western media. Immediate reaction by the western nations. The fall in EU-China relations. The arms embargo. Arguments within the EU.

Generations of human rights Civil and political rights Economic, social and cultural rights Groups rights The liberal and realist states differ on

the priorities to be given. Universal declaration of human

rights, Vienna convention.

Human rights in China before 1989. The Great Leap Forward The cultural revolution The Hukou system One child policy Capital punishment

What led to the protests in 1989?

Hu Yaobang

Initially a Mao loyalist. Was also a close associate of Deng

Xiaoping. Was instrumental in healing China after the

cultural revolution. Served as general secretary of the party

between 1982-1987 Favored a more autonomous Tibet. Was sympathetic to the liberal intelligentsia

in China. Lost favour within the party and was forced to resign.

The case of Zhao Zhiyang

One of the most important leaders responsible for the pro-democracy movement.

Was a close associate of Deng Xiaoping Responsible for rapid economic reforms, first in Sichuan,

then all over China. Was himself a victim of the cultural revolution Believed that economic growth was linked to

democratization. Proposed a separation of the party and state. Was the general secretary of the party between 87 and

89. Were the free-est years in the history of contemporary

china. Was involved in the Tiananmen square protests.

The Tiananmen square protests Started brewing since the death of Hu

Yaobang Students from various universities decided

to protest against the forced resignation and mourn his death.

Students assembled at the Tiananmen square in groups of increasing sizes starting from April.

Angered by the remark made in People’s Daily.

Martial Law declared by May 20.

The response by the party

After the martial law was introduced, the army started making attempts to enter the city.

The 27th and the 28th units from outside Beijing were employed.

On June 4th, the PLA opened fire on the crowds standing at the square and within minutes hundreds were killed.

Tanks were used in the crushing of the protests. The tanks literally crushed people by treading over the bodies.

Protestors tried to fight against the army. There were blockades around the square and it was

as if the army was looking to maximize deaths.

Media Coverage

The protests were very well covered by national media initially and the news of protest spread like wildfire.

There were mini protests in hundreds of cities and students travelled to Beijing to participate.

Mikhail Gorbachev’s visit. Hundreds of foreign journalists present at the

square. One of the first events to be covered in such

minute detail. The Tank Man. One of the 100 most influential

people of the world- The Time.

Reaction by the west

Shocked at the audacity with which the protests were crushed.

Were largely perceived as a statement by the Communist party against democracy.

A boost to the anti-communist paranoia. India asked the press to keep the coverage

to bare-minimum. The E.U. cancelled all loans and deals and

issued an embargo against arms trade with China.

Influenced public opinion.

China and

European Union

Relationship established in 1975, although Sweden had established relations in 1950.

Signed a Trade and Economic Cooperation agreement in 1985.

Immediately after the 4th June violence, some members EU froze all relations.

12 EU members meet on June 27th to adopt a declaration, with wide ranging measures against China.

After a phase of full isolation from world community, China’s economic and political significance made EU establish contacts once again.

In October 1990, the European Council and Parliament decided to gradually re-establish bilateral links with China.

Arms Embargo Issued in June 1989, only EU embargo adopted before Maastricht

Treaty was signed in 1992. Different interpretations by different countries. To deny China the capability to be able challenge US superiority in

region, to prevent an arms race and to deter China from adopting a belligerent position on Taiwan.

Japan has also pressurized EU to maintain the embargo. US has a interest in maintaining stability in the region, while EU

does not. But EU is involved in strategic relationship with US through NATO.

China does not connect Taiwan question with the EU Relations. The initial purpose of addressing the violent repression of the pro-

democracy movement has broadened into improving human rights in China. The purpose of the embargo keeps shifting and expanding.

Debates on the Embargo Imposing an embargo on a strategic partner was seen by many in China and within the EU as an anomaly.

France, Germany and Italy make moves for lifting the embargo in 2003.

US objected to the process.

Formal willingness along with ‘Toolbox’.

In March 2005, the Chinese People’s Congress adopted the “anti-secession law”.

In April 2005, the European Parliament, by 431 votes in favour to 85 votes against, decided not to support a lifting.

China was asked to satisfy three conditions for withdrawal of embargo.

Human rights situation in China was still a concern for the European Commission.

The embargo debate has been discreet.

Different Countries

Different Views France’s approach is that the EU arms embargo covers lethal military equipment and major weapon platforms.

The U.K. interprets the embargo as merely including “lethal weapons that are likely to be used for internal repression”.

Germany has included the embargo in its national legislation, which implies that exports of a purely military nature are strictly limited.

The Czech Republic does not permit exports of lethal weapons to China.

Sweden does not allow any exports of military equipment to the China.

Thus, contrary to what could be expected, EU countries’ arms exports to China have increased since the embargo was adopted in 1989.

Predominantly trade relationships, with very formal bilateral security dialogs.

Bilateral trade was worth 370 billion euros in 2009. Ambiguous situation on embargo, Tibetan riots and Xinjiang did not

help either. Arguments for removing the ban: It will help EU increase exports, is

not considered an efficient instrument and China’s improved behavior (domestically and internationally). It will also improve competitive advantage of EU.

China wants its options to diversify, remove the US embargo, persuade EU not to sell weapons to Taiwan and to develop technology.

Arguments for keeping the ban: China has not improved, it should not be strengthened, sensitive technology might leak, Russia may increase supplies, Taiwan and other factors, China may re-export and EU may lose a political tool.

China and

European UnionToday

References

Jerker Hellström : The EU Arms Embargo on

China: a Swedish Perspective.