EU Foreign Policy and Contempt for Human Rights

[onedomino]

Human Rights, EU Wrongs
By EURSOC Two
29 March, 2005

http://www.eursoc.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/755

Human rights are said to be central to the concept of the European Union. So why are EU leaders so desperate to suck up to the world's worst dictators?

Thankfully, there is something outside the EU known as "The Real World" that sometimes reminds Eurocrats of their hypocrisy. Take the furore - and low-level international crisis - provoked by the Franco-German led plan sell high-tech weaponry to China.

France has made the removal of the arms embargo to China a central plank of its foreign policy. Germany, with 5.2 million unemployed, is desperate to tap into China's market, where the Communist Party has made lifting the embargo practically a condition for privileged trading status. Britain dragged its feet over approving lifting the embargo, but shamefully agreed to go along with EU plans to lift it sometime this year.

Enter reality. First, German Green party members questioned whether Germany ought to sell arms to a leading abuser of human rights. The embargo was put in place after the Tiananmen Square massacre in 1989, in which thousands of democracy activists were murdered. China is yet to atone for the massacre, and worse, has not said it would not do the same again in future.

Germany's Greens are an important coalition partner for the ruling Social Democrats.

Then came pressure from the United States. The US has loudly opposed the EU's plans, particularly arming China would shift the balance of power in the Pacific. France, and some EU-federalist diehards, delighted in Washington's discomfort but moderate nations were concerned that the US might follow through with the threat to drop technology-development agreements with EU states if the ban was lifted. British arms manufacturers made it clear that they would not sell to China, even if the ban went.

Then there was Taiwan. China wants high tech weapons to threaten Taiwan, the democracy it sees as a renegade province. Some governments quietly questioned why the EU was so eager to arm a dictatorship that threatens a democracy. However, when the Chinese congress passed a law that declared its hostile intent against Taiwan earlier this month, the whispering campaign grew irresistible: Insiders in Europe and Washington claimed that the French-led dream of selling arms to China would be shelved for the time being.

No-one told EU foreign policy chief Javier Solanas, though. He continued to complain that the ban was unfair, as China has made "progress" towards improving human rights.

Not so, say 500 Chinese human rights activists, who wrote an open letter to the EU last week urging leaders to keep the ban. China has made no progress on human rights since Tiananmen, they said. Lifting the ban would "send the wrong signal" to the Chinese people, especially those who are persecuted and their families.

Will Europe listen?

Not on the evidence of its latest human rights blunder, this time in Fidel Castro's Cuba.

Louis Michel, the EU's development commissioner, was in Havana to suck up to Castro following the suspension of EU sanctions against the dictatorship. The sanctions were put in place in 2003 following a particularly nasty bout of anti-dissident oppression. However, the new Spanish socialist government has pressured for the sanctions to go, and the EU has kindly obliged.

But Michel was under not illusions that there is oppression in Cuba, oh no. He was even allowed to speak to the families of some pro-democracy and human rights campaigners, who he advised to "avoid provoking" the dictatorship.

"Avoid provoking?" In other words, shut up and put up with Castro's repression. What a fine example of EU human rights led foreign policy.

Again, enter the real world, this time in the form of economist Marta Beatriz Roque, who was allowed to meet Michel.

"Respectfully disagreeing" with the EU's move to lift sanctions, she disagreed with Michel's claim that the fact that the meetings took place was a positive step:

""The government is not going to change. Castro is deaf. Sanctions have a political value because they demonstrate to the whole world that Castro is a human rights abuser. The EU should not be seeking deeper relations with a totalitarian regime," (...)

"The fact that we could meet Mr Michel one day, for an hour, is an isolated phenomenon.

"The Cuban government allowed it to take place so the EU would see what the authorities wanted them to see. I don't understand how Mr Michel, who is an intelligent person, can think that he understands Cuba in the short time that he was here."

Just what sort of signal is the EU trying to send on human rights?

-

 

[Annie]

Have to agree with you onedomino, France and Germany have been undermining all attempts to stop problems from erupting for a long time now. I wouldn't throw Britain into the mix, though they've had their problems, but no moreso than the US catering to Fox in Mexico.

I keep trying to figure out what is the French led motivation; undermining US hegemony or trying to save their economy?

 

[padisha emperor]

Funny...

When I read your message, I see that the situation in france is hopeless, the french economy is out, and the human rights are denied.
and I see that the US situation is bright, no violation of human rights......


Don't be worried, France goes not so bad as you mean.
And for the Human Rights, don't be worried too...we have in Europe a real good system of Human Rights defense. In France wehave a real good too. So, on 2 different scales, soon 3, we have a systelmof protection of these rights. It is not the situation of a lot of countries, there is that only in Europe.

Guantanamo ? Abu Grahib ? and probably also all so many little violations in the US soil....

 

[Said1]

Don't be worried, France goes not so bad as you mean.
And for the Human Rights, don't be worried too...we have in Europe a real good system of Human Rights defense. In France wehave a real good too. So, on 2 different scales, soon 3, we have a systelmof protection of these rights. It is not the situation of a lot of countries, there is that only in Europe.

Guantanamo ? Abu Grahib ? and probably also all so many little violations in the US soil....

What is France planning to do with French/non-French arrested terrorists found in your country now? Also, are you saying that your human rights are not protected now, even though you do have a good human rights defense system, but additional systems of protection are needed to protect the system of protection?(see point 2 and 3).

Oh, and how's Jerry Lewis doing at the box office these days?

 

[onedomino]

Funny...

When I read your message, I see that the situation in france is hopeless, the french economy is out, and the human rights are denied.
and I see that the US situation is bright, no violation of human rights......


Don't be worried, France goes not so bad as you mean.
And for the Human Rights, don't be worried too...we have in Europe a real good system of Human Rights defense. In France wehave a real good too. So, on 2 different scales, soon 3, we have a systelmof protection of these rights. It is not the situation of a lot of countries, there is that only in Europe.

Guantanamo ? Abu Grahib ? and probably also all so many little violations in the US soil....

What does your response have to do with the subject of this thread? The above quoted article refers to EU foreign policy promoting weapons sales to known human rights abusers in China. The article also criticizes the EU policy of normalizing relations with the despot Castro.

 

[theim]

Gitmo is a non-issue. Some terrorists are being held in outdoor cells, where they are allowed to pray, excersise, etc. Some are let go to commit more terrorist attacks. Boo-frickady-hoo.

Abu Ghraib? Am I to believe the panty incident weighs equal on the scales of history with Fidel Castro, Red China's crackdowns, the USSR, and other dictatorships?

Again, like the article says, you could use a dose of reality.

 

[padisha emperor]

I keep trying to figure out what is the French led motivation; undermining US hegemony or trying to save their economy?

France 'goal in the life is not undermining the USA, you know. We are not obsess by the USA. (it is not like on this board, where the obsession is to bash France, but anyway...) (joke, be quiet )

If France want to have some contracts with China, it is it right.
I think that France wouldn't be the first country in the world who have trade agreements and cooperation with a country who has not a great respect for the human rights. France has political relations with such countries, and trade, commercial relations too.
USA have good relations with Saudi Arabia, one of the most integrist country in his policy, for the women, the human rights.....but the USA are friends with S-A, and have trade and diplomatic relations....

So, why a such noise and hell for France and Germany ?

 

[Said1]

France 'goal in the life is not undermining the USA, you know. We are not obsess by the USA. (it is not like on this board, where the obsession is to bash France, but anyway...) (joke, be quiet )

If France want to have some contracts with China, it is it right.
I think that France wouldn't be the first country in the world who have trade agreements and cooperation with a country who has not a great respect for the human rights. France has political relations with such countries, and trade, commercial relations too.
USA have good relations with Saudi Arabia, one of the most integrist country in his policy, for the women, the human rights.....but the USA are friends with S-A, and have trade and diplomatic relations....

So, why a such noise and hell for France and Germany ?

I think Saudi Arabia has said they would at least try to resolve certain issues, even though the Sa'ud family is responsible for creating much of what is taking place within their country in order to protect their own interests. The same can not be said for China, which is obvious by their denial of abuses and continued threats against their neighbours et al.

 

[padisha emperor]

I will not defend China in this post. Only to show an other side of this country.
But of course I am agaijst the violation of human rights.



China have about 1.5 billions of inhabitants, maybe more. Maybe near of 2 billions.
the most populated country on earth.
And China had always an awesome population. They have historickly some behavior who were not really pretty for the inhabitants. A little bit like the Pharaons during the pyramids' construction. In China it was for the Great Wall, thousands of deads.
So, it is in the Chinese's minds that the life has not the worth of the life in occident. For us, life is the most precious thing, but for the chinese, it is not necessary it.
If they have a so strong penal law system : imagine, a country with 1.5 billions of people : to stop the infractions, you have to show strong example : then,; death penalties, torturesmaybe....I don't defend it, but some chinese think like that. They're so many that a life has not the same worth.

i know a teacher of Fundamental liberties, she did 1 year in China, and she was unable to explain the notion of Human Rights, the chinese students didn't understand it. they are not dumber than us, it is only that it is not their culture.

 

[Said1]

And China had always an awesome population. They have historickly some behavior who were not really pretty for the inhabitants. A little bit like the Pharaons during the pyramids' construction. In China it was for the Great Wall, thousands of deads.
So, it is in the Chinese's minds that the life has not the worth of the life in occident. For us, life is the most precious thing, but for the chinese, it is not necessary it.

Are you drunk? Didn't we just have a discussion regarding atrocities commited by many, many french rulers and political leaders?

If they have a so strong penal law system : imagine, a country with 1.5 billions of people : to stop the infractions, you have to show strong example : then,; death penalties, torturesmaybe....I don't defend it, but some chinese think like that. They're so many that a life has not the same worth.

Sure they think that, how else would their communist regime remain in power if they didn't have such a blatant disrespect for human life?

France and Germany have a post-colonial history of trying to extend their regional influence and dominate economically through the sale of arms, I guess no one should be surprised now, eh? Especially since their mis-use and abuse of international organizations has sadly come to an end.

 

[onedomino]

So, it is in the Chinese's minds that the life has not the worth of the life in occident. For us, life is the most precious thing, but for the chinese, it is not necessary it.

That is sick and twisted ethnocentric bullshit.

 

[Said1]

That is sick and twisted ethnocentric bullshit.

Although very typical if you consider the source. :gross2:

 

[padisha emperor]

It was not ethnocentric

I was repeating the things telling to me by the teacher who teach one year in China.
i think that she knows well this culture, becasue she's crazy about China.
But this journey was disappointing for her. She was disappointed by the Chinese reality.
She is a teacher of human rights, that's the subject of what she teaches, so I think she is able to say some things about the chinese conception of the Human rights.

So, no ethnocentrism, or anything else.

Are you drunk? Didn't we just have a discussion regarding atrocities commited by many, many french rulers and political leaders?

It was to make an illustration about the fact that the high population of China did and does that life had not our worth (occidental worth, if you want), not the same conception.

Of course, the french leaders are the bloodiest of the Humanity stroy, I don't deny it.
The genocide of the amrican indians, it is the French. The darfur too. The Cabodgian genocide with Polpot, it is again the French. And above all the rwanda. also us. the genocides in Jugoslavia too.......

I never meant that the french leaders have the hands totally clean, but it is totally not the subject.

 

[Annie]

So PE, France and Germany can ignore the human rights abuses, because according to someone you believe, for she loves the Chinese culture, since the Chinese don't believe in, there is no reason to abide by 'international rules?'

 

[Said1]

So, no ethnocentrism, or anything else.

Yes it is, as is everything else you wrote, with regard to Chinese culture.

Here is what you said "Over population and the construction of the Great Wall of China explains their lack of regard for human life". By your logic, history would tell me that the french and germans have ZERO respect for human life today too. If it sounds absurd when I say it, how do think it sounds when you say it about the Chinese?

 

[padisha emperor]

No.
I said that France and Germnay have trade with China.
China didn't respect the human rights, but they had also a different conception of them.
There is not a real link, i admit it, but my first point was that USA have trade realtions with some countries, which don't respect more than China the human rights.

If China would becompe the so giant might mentionned by everybody, do you think really that USA would avoid a such awesome opportunity for the trade ?
seriously, it is impossible that US miss on purpose a such occasion.

 

[Annie]

No.
I said that France and Germnay have trade with China.
China didn't respect the human rights, but they had also a different conception of them.
There is not a real link, i admit it, but my first point was that USA have trade realtions with some countries, which don't respect more than China the human rights.

If China would becompe the so giant might mentionned by everybody, do you think really that USA would avoid a such awesome opportunity for the trade ?
seriously, it is impossible that US miss on purpose a such occasion.

Padisha, show me one person on this board that thinks our relations with SA should be good? The French are morally bankrupt, you know it, we know it, the Chinese know it, Saddam knew it, etc.

 

[Said1]

No.
I said that France and Germnay have trade with China.
China didn't respect the human rights, but they had also a different conception of them.
There is not a real link, i admit it, but my first point was that USA have trade realtions with some countries, which don't respect more than China the human rights.

If China would becompe the so giant might mentionned by everybody, do you think really that USA would avoid a such awesome opportunity for the trade ?
seriously, it is impossible that US miss on purpose a such occasion.

I responded to that thread, didn't you see it? As for the rest, it's mightly big of you to admit you were wrong! :moon4:

 

[j07950]

I personally am against europe selling weapons to China, but honneslty, how long is it going to take China to acquire those weapons from other countries around the world ("clean" countries could buy weapons and then sell them secretly to China) or China could even say developp their own...with all the brains they've got in that country I don't see how they couldn't come up with their own weapons...
So I'm not saying Europe should sell weapons, I'm against it, I just say it's only a matter of time until China has the same technologie as the west, let's concetrate on a way to pressure them into being more democratic...especially in regards of Taiwan

 

[Said1]

I personally am against europe selling weapons to China, but honneslty, how long is it going to take China to acquire those weapons from other countries around the world ("clean" countries could buy weapons and then sell them secretly to China) or China could even say developp their own...with all the brains they've got in that country I don't see how they couldn't come up with their own weapons...
So I'm not saying Europe should sell weapons, I'm against it, I just say it's only a matter of time until China has the same technologie as the west, let's concetrate on a way to pressure them into being more democratic...especially in regards of Taiwan

What clean countries? Germany and France? At this point, the need to buy weapons and systems suggests they are not able to afford the cost of developing their own. It is cheaper to buy them then it is to develop and manufacture your own. Selling China weapons and systems will also invovle training, by the euros, which will probably lead to future development of their own weapons and systems. This is just my opinion though, I could be totally wrong.