Nowadays, the West can be described as decadent. That does not mean simply that we are addicted to “bread and circuses,” from welfare programs in Europe (which we can barely afford) to the Super Bowl in the US. It means also that we are increasingly reluctant to allow our own vision of civil liberties and human rights to shape our foreign policies, owing to the potential commercial costs.
Consider the case of the Chinese dissident and Nobel Peace Prize laureate Liu Xiaobo (劉曉波), who recently died while serving an 11-year prison sentence for calling for democracy in China. The Chinese authorities refused Liu’s request, made just weeks before his death, to seek treatment abroad for his aggressive cancer, and his wife remains under house arrest.
China’s treatment of dissidents like Liu is nothing short of savage. Yet Western leaders have offered only a few carefully phrased diplomatic statements criticizing it.
I can only wonder how many Western leaders in recent years have raised Liu’s case with their Chinese counterparts behind closed doors. Opportunities surely abounded, including at this summer’s G20 meeting, when Liu was on his deathbed.
However, it seems unlikely that Western leaders confronted Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) on the matter. After all, when Liu was awarded the Nobel Prize in 2010, and an infuriated China attempted to ostracize Norway, the West did not express outrage or display real solidarity with a NATO ally.
China’s treatment of Hong Kong has gone similarly uncontested by Western leaders. China seems intent on violating its obligations, established in the “joint declaration” signed with the UK, to preserve the territory’s way of life and the rule of law until 2047.
Already, it has threatened the independence of the judiciary, the autonomy of universities, and freedom of the press. Yet there has been little pushback from the West, including the UK.
Why are Western countries so reluctant to criticize China’s behavior more loudly and consistently?
The answer, it seems, is money.
Greece, which proudly claims to be the cradle of democracy, has leaders who largely grew up opposing an authoritarian military government.
Yet its cash-strapped government recently blocked the EU from criticizing China’s human-rights record at the UN, because China provides critical investment, particularly from the China Ocean Shipping Co, which in August last year acquired a majority stake in the port of Piraeus.
Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras — a supposedly radical leftist who, paying homage to Che Guevara, named his son Ernesto — has become a Chinese patsy.
The West’s moral bankruptcy is on display closer to home, too. The EU continues to hold back from condemning the thuggery of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, who has proudly boasted of his belief in “illiberal democracy” (an oxymoron if ever there was one).
Under Orban’s leadership, breaches of human-rights conventions in the treatment of refugees have been accompanied by a crackdown on civil society, particularly on organizations that receive money from outside the country.
One notable target of repression is Central European University, a bastion of open debate, teaching and research in Hungary, which is funded by billionaire George Soros.
Orban has even gone so far as to resurrect some of the nastiest anti-Semitic images of 1930s Hungary (an ally of Nazi Germany) to demonize Soros.
Yet Orban himself attended the University of Oxford (where I am chancellor) on a Soros-funded scholarship, and studied there under the great liberal thinker Isaiah Berlin.
Even as Orban’s Hungary rejects the obligations of EU membership, it receives more than 5.5 billion euros (US$6.39 billion) from the EU each year, while contributing less than 1 billion euros to the common budget.
Why should European citizens pay so much to a government that thumbs its nose at them and compares the EU to the Soviet Union?
At the very least, the EU should apply the provisions of the Lisbon Treaty that allow it to suspend some of the rights of a country that is breaking its rules, and showing contempt for its standards and values.
The behavior of Poland’s Law and Justice (PiS) government — which shows scant concern for either law or justice — raises similar issues.
The government is working to overhaul the constitution, in order to thwart democratic checks and balances. It plainly wants judges to do what politicians tell them, and it does not want the media to be able to say much about it.
I daresay that China’s rulers would have no difficulty in understanding the PiS’ approach.
Turkey, of course, is not a member of the EU, nor will it ever become one if it continues along the road of dictatorial repression taken by Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, no small fan of Russian President Vladimir Putin.
However, judging by the EU’s growing tolerance of illiberalism, some EU leaders may well be prepared to contemplate a closer relationship with Erdogan’s Turkey.
Such foreign-policy decadence threatens to undermine the EU’s claim to be a community of values, not just a glorified customs union.
As we know from the 1920s and 1930s, as decadence breeds more decadence, the world becomes an increasingly dangerous and unstable place.
It is time for Europe — to be joined by the US after US President Donald Trump leaves office — to find our moral compass once again.
Chris Patten, the last British governor of Hong Kong and a former EU commissioner for external affairs, is chancellor of the University of Oxford.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under