Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2005-03-10-Speech-4-187"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2005-03-10"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Situation in Tibet2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20050310.22.4-187"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2005-03-10-Speech-4-1882
lpv:speaker	lp:Jonas Sjöstedt2
lpv:spokenAs	substitute; Delegation for relations with Switzerland, Iceland and Norway and to the European Economic Area (EEA) Joint Parliamentary Committee (2004-09-15--2006-09-26)3 unknown; Vänsterpartiet (2004-07-20--2006-09-26)3 substitute; CONT (2004-07-21--2006-09-26)3 member; ENVI (2004-07-21--2006-09-26)3 substitute; INTA (2004-07-21--2006-09-26)3 member; EUL/NGL (2004-07-20--2006-09-26)3 member; Delegation to the ACP-EU Joint Parliamentary Assembly (2004-09-15--2006-09-26)3
lpv:translated text	"Mr President, I wish to begin by thanking the Commissioner for his answer to the question. As has been quite rightly pointed out, the Tibetans are being denied their most basic political and democratic rights. What, moreover, we see, and have seen for a long time, is an all but systematic destruction of their cultural heritage and of their ability to practise their religion. The example given by the Commissioner, namely of monks being imprisoned for having portraits of the Dalai Lama, is just one example of how absurd this oppression is. As is well known, the EU has expressed this view on quite a number of occasions. The question is: is this enough? It would be interesting to hear more about plans for the future. How is the pressure on China to be increased where the issue of Tibet is concerned? China is now an economic and political giant which is increasingly also becoming a global player. There must, however, be no beating about the bush where China is concerned. The positive economic development is in no way matched by correspondingly positive democratic development. We see nothing of that at present. On the contrary, the fact is that China’s economic progress is partly based upon its systematically denying its own workers their most basic rights. Policy on China is therefore a test of the EU’s credibility on human rights issues. Economic interests vie with support for Tibetans’ and other Chinese people’s political and democratic rights. That test is one that the EU must pass. It would therefore be quite absurd to do what is now proposed, namely to lift the arms embargo on China. That would be to give two different signals at the same time. There would be oral criticism, but a simultaneous demonstration in practical terms that another type of relationship with China was desired, with little real importance attached to the oppression practised by that country. The EU must adopt a more consistent attitude."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph