China’s underhand tactics at the UN Human Rights Council are a serious problem, but should come as no surprise.
China has undergone a third review of its human rights record at the UN Human Rights Council as part of the organization’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR).
This is a process all UN member states must go through every five years and gives other countries the opportunity to question and put forward recommendations. With the input of civil society groups, the UPR is supposed to be an opportunity to raise serious concerns, monitor progress and hold governments to account.
Naturally, Chinese officials faced robust questioning about a number of issues, including political prisoners, torture and freedom of expression.
The situation in Xinjiang, which is home to a vast network of detention camps for the region’s Muslim minorities, was rightly put in the spotlight in a way that it simply had not been before. Likewise, Hong Kong, an area not raised during previous UPRs, was mentioned by 12 countries which expressed concerns about the deteriorating levels of freedom.
Scrutiny was in abundance — not that this necessarily means much. When you have a country like China under review, whose government holds the concept of human rights in contempt, the process can quickly turn into a farce.
The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) will not advance human rights that threaten its one-party rule. As a result, the regime is quick to deny or deflect any allegations thrown at it.
Responding to the events at the third UPR, Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokeswoman Hua Chunying (華春瑩) branded it “politically biased, malicious and unreasonable accusations made by a very small number of people.”
This response follows a similar pattern whereby Beijing bleats on about “respecting national sovereignty” and goes on to criticize its critics for “naming and shaming,” and accuses them of “double standards.”
In the rare moments when the CCP talks human rights, it does so on its own terms by discarding their universality and inalienability. Human rights depend on culture and development, according to the CCP, which is convenient as it allows it to sideline political rights and boast about raising living standards.
This agenda to redefine human rights in international bodies is being aggressively pushed by Beijing. What the UPR process shows is that there are plenty of dictators and strongmen out there happy to go along with the CCP.
Take Pakistan, which is currently enjoying the patronage of Beijing, and its approach to the UPR. You would think as an Islamic Republic it might speak up for the many Muslims facing persecution in Xinjiang, but no, unlike many other countries, Pakistan avoided raising the serious human rights issues there. Being the sycophant it is, the Pakistani government praised China for making “tremendous achievements in implementing the right to development.”
Similar flattery came from Russia, which praised China for advancing the rule of law, while Algeria went for the softball approach by asking Beijing to share “its experience and good practices in guaranteeing the right to education of ethnic minorities.”
Back in 2013, the process was completely distorted by Cuba, which used the UPR to recommend that Beijing “investigate activities of fabrication and dissemination of false information, and take measures with regard to persons engaged in illegal activities through [the] Internet.”
It should come as no surprise to hear that China supported this recommendation.
Such moves, which make a mockery of the UPR, are commonplace.
The UN is a forum for 193 member states and to be a forum for the world it is naturally compromised. Yet the UN’s inevitable flaws do not excuse the underhand tricks used by Beijing to undermine the Human Rights Council’s work.
As well as blocking access into China for UN human rights observers, particularly to ethnic minority areas, the CCP also meddles in the council by harassing officials and those rights groups that engage with them.
During China’s latest UPR, numerous human rights organizations have criticized the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, which oversees the process, for removing references and citations to non-governmental organizations and groups from a stakeholder report published online. This included the World Uyghur Congress, the Uyghur Human Rights Project, the Tibetan Center for Human Rights and Democracy, and Hong Kong political party Demosisto.
While the office did, belatedly, reverse this act of censorship, it nonetheless highlights a much bigger problem. After all, this is not the first time China has tried to block its critics from participating in the Human Rights Council’s procedures.
A Human Rights Watch report last year highlighted numerous occasions when the Chinese government has sought to marginalize non-governmental organizations at the UN.
In the most benign cases China pressures UN officials to enforce pro-CCP terminology, thereby silencing ethnic minority groups who it regards as “splittists.” The more extreme examples documented note the harassment of activists and witnesses during hearings.
At the latest UPR, like many other reviews, China used denial, deflection and dirty tricks to undermine scrutiny of its human rights record.
As the CCP more assertively pushes its own version of human rights on the world stage, those who stand for universal and inalienable human rights should expect more of this sort of behavior — and must continue to challenge it.
Gray Sergeant is a postgraduate student of Chinese politics at the University of London’s School of Oriental and African Studies and a human rights advocate.
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
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
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