Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2007-12-12-Speech-3-229"

PredicateValue (sorted: default)
rdf:type
dcterms:Date
dcterms:Is Part Of
dcterms:Language
lpv:document identification number
"en.20071212.27.3-229"2
lpv:hasSubsequent
lpv:speaker
lpv:spoken text
"Madam President, I much admire the contribution of China to the development of world civilisation. In terms of technology, in terms of society and in terms of culture, China has probably contributed more than any other country to the development of humankind. I regret that China’s growing economic maturity is not accompanied by a growing political maturity. But I regret, too, that the European Union is not doing more to push China in the right direction. Two days ago, on the 60th anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the Union proclaimed its commitment to the ‘promotion and protection of human rights throughout the world as a cornerstone of our external action policy’. And yet, two weeks ago, Messrs Barroso and Socrates left the summit early, having secured Europe’s economic interests, leaving officials to negotiate the conclusions – conclusions which, unsurprisingly, made little mention of human rights, supported the lifting of the arms embargo and opposed Taiwan’s bid to join the United Nations. They did much to undermine Mr Solana’s carefully crafted words the previous month. I wonder what the world is coming to when the European Union, the self-styled protector of universal, interdependent and indivisible human rights, fails to speak out clearly against one of the world’s worst human rights abusers. I suspect that both the Chinese and others may come to regret the decision to host the Olympic Games in Beijing. The Chinese authorities themselves promised that they would bring a greater climate of freedom and openness. And yet figures from Human Rights Watch suggest that abuses have increased in the last seven years. Not only does China continue to execute more people than the rest of the world combined but it has clamped down dramatically on internal dissent and media freedom in advance of the Games. These developments violate the spirit of the Olympic Charter. They are in direct contravention of commitments made by the Beijing authorities themselves in the Host City Contract which they signed with the International Olympic Committee. That contract has not been made public. Why? Because, if the world saw the complete and total disjunction between Chinese promises and Chinese practices, we would have no choice but to boycott Beijing in the same way that we boycotted apartheid South Africa. I do not believe in boycotts. I have also maintained that engaging with a China committed to reform and opening would bring greater fruits than empty threats. But President Hu Jintao has to accept that a deal is a deal. The Host City Contract, the human rights clause in the Chinese Constitution, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights – these are promises made to China’s citizens. If China wants the Olympics to prove its legitimacy and credibility to the world, then in return it must prove that it is willing to honour its human rights commitments: by improving media freedom in line with the Olympic pledges, by suspending the death penalty in line with United Nations demands, by ceasing its support for military dictators from Burma to Darfur and by allowing elections by universal suffrage in Hong Kong. That is how China can win its place at the heart of the international community."@en1
lpv:spokenAs
lpv:unclassifiedMetadata

Named graphs describing this resource:

1http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/English.ttl.gz
2http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/Events_and_structure.ttl.gz
3http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/rdf/spokenAs.ttl.gz

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph