Comments on: Lyon EU-PRC summit off: what happened to proportionality?

By: JB WU

JB WU — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 01:44:54 +0000

Well said, Jane!

You are not alone!!!!

By: Jane

Jane — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 17:34:22 +0000

I also enjoy reading Stanley’s blog on China. I agree with Stanley on many issues about China. Stanley’s views are more realistic, comprehensive and not radical.
@ John. Yes, the Chinese consider the EC leaders meeting with the Dalai Lama an act of disrespect. An act of betrayal at the expense of the Chinese territorial integraty. Why the Chinese national territorial integraty is treated so lightly and childishly by British leader, German leader, and the French leader? To them, it is an object, a rock to haul at the Chinese whenever they feel like it.
Please don’t try to separate the Chinese government and the Chinese on this issue. Please don’t call the Chinese brainwashed.what make the Europeans think that Chinese will allow anybody, under the religious name or any other name, to break up their country. The European leaders know that too, and what is most absurd of it, they recognize Tibet as part of China. Still they manipulate this issue by massive biased criticism and meetings with the DL, awarding him the Prize. Do your Europeans consider these kinds of behavior moral and decent?
The DL has been advocating the “middle way”. He said he did not want independence. But he wanted a greater Tibet, which includes the original Tibet, and part of Qinhai, Gansu, etc, because Tibetans live there, too. If that is allowed, should we claim China towns in Europe part of China too just because Chinese live there?
He also wants all Hun Chinese leave his greater Tibet so that the Tibetan culture can be preserved. By the same token, shouldn’t all the white Europeans leave south America, Australia so that the natives can preserve their culture? I never quite understand the west, who promotes racial tolerance or at least claims to be, will support such racist segregation by the DL. Could it be the Hun Chinese not worthy enough for your racial equality?
Not to mention why anybody wants the DL, a so called spiritual leader, to engage in political endeavours and calls himself head of the government-in-exile? Hasn’t the Europe leave the medieval dark age behind? Or the European politicians have lost all common sense, morals, basic universal virtues when it comes to Tibet issue?
The cloak of the DL’s compassion can not cover all the ugliness.
Stongly support the Chinese government’s decison to put off talks. Our territorial integraty is not your chocolate cake, enjoyed at your leisure.

By: john

john — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 08:08:21 +0000

Stanley, i always enjoy reading your blog particuarly because of the insights you help offer into the machinery of EU foreign policy

and usually i am quite content to do so passively

on this occassion however i am impatient to intervene (particularly as i have a classroom full of negotiation students puzzling away at the why of the breakdown)

with all due respect to the moral positions highlighted by previous commentators – just how fundamental is this breakdown?

is what happened last week a symptom of a relationship that has begun to take on a more adversarial dynamic? (i dont mean this in the sense that the pca touches on sensitive issues i mean this in the sense that the economics behind the relationship are becoming more politicised)

is the snub “retribution”? a way of signalling to certain personalities (or as some have suggested other actors) that meeting with the dali lama are viewed as an act of disrespect, one that doesnt fit with strategic partner?

i know there are other possible explanations for what happened and these will become more or less plausible with the benefit of more information

irrespective of this – moving past the why of it – what of the what now

is the eu and china relationship that has developed up til now still working (are the meetings still going on)?

do the “partners” have the means available to repair the relationship quickly or to limit the damage?

All bridges need support

By: Jane

Jane — Wed, 03 Dec 2008 06:45:43 +0000

As a Chinese, I am totally disgusted by European’s manipulation with Tibet issue. It is beyond doubt that it is the wish of 1.3 billion Chinese to maintain our territorial integraty, as you can see in the protests against Free Tibet in and outside China. But in the European media and some politicians’s eyes, that wish is not human right
and can be trampled on whenever they want. This is what I call blatant voilation of Chinese human rights.
The truth redarding the Tibet under the Dalai Lama’s rule, the fact regarding his political role, his involvements with certain government agencies, his so called “Middle Way”, have never been disclosed factually in the European media. His activities have never promoted the understanding and racial tolerance between the Tibetans and Hun Chinese. In fact, he has been instigating hatrid and confrontation between them. The peace prize given to him is a sure indication of how the west has lost their basic ground of right or wrong. Or in a deeper level, how the west has twisted fact to fit their goal. You have lost our trust.
Given the atrocities the Europeans have done to China and Asia in last centuries, what high moral ground can the Europeans assume? The Tibet issue is exactly the result of British Invasion. You said the Chinese should forget their 100 years humiliation. But don’t you think the Europeans should stop their 100 years habit of poking their finger in our apple pie?
If the EC recognizes Tibet as part of China, then its leaders should not meet with any person who engages in separation. Your meeting should be regarded as supporting or plotting. If you are not leaders, nobody cares.
Can China decide who the European leaders meet? Absolutely no. But a relation builds on mutual respect and trust. I repeat, mutual. Why does China have to live with the manipulatin?
I fully support my government’s stance. There is no point in associating with two-faced, double standard, back-stabbing, manipulative EC leaders.
Boycott French!

By: Hemulen

Hemulen — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 16:33:20 +0000

I agree that the EU would benefit from some strategic coordination on the Tibet question, but I get a bit worried when I read statements like this:

Talk about seeing him as a religious leader does not explain why a leader of only 3 000 000 meets so many western leaders so frequently. And what do they talk about? Religion?

Actually there are 6 million Tibetans in China, but that is immaterial to the question. The treatment of minorities is a litmus test for the decency of a society and the Chinese government has not only failed that test, this year, it started to openly pander to Han chauvinist sentiments in order to counter the Tibetan movement.

@teresopolis

To compare DL to ETA or the IRA is wide of the mark to say the least.

By: teresopolis

teresopolis — Sat, 29 Nov 2008 06:42:57 +0000

@Alex Berkofsky: what if Chinese leaders meet regularly with IRA, or ETA members, provide a platform for them on the world stage. Do you think that will sit well with UK or Spain?

The EU governments are hypocrites to say the least.

By: axel berkofsky

axel berkofsky — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 07:49:33 +0000

stanley, i was sure that you would write something on this. your comments are
(surprisingly) balanced, but you fail to mention that china ‘not allowing’ europeans to meet the dalai lama classifies as ‘interference’ in european affairs. important to mention that as ‘non-interference’ in china’s internal affairs is beijing’s central foreign policy mantra and it seems that beijing is not prepared to grant europe the right to implement its foreign policies with chinese interference.

plus i am not sure what you mean by the ep’s ‘irresponsible behaviour’ towards china. the ep is very critical on many issues-what is the problem with that? you would need to add some substance to this.