Sir, David Miliband’s comments in relation to the Chinese security forces’ response to the protests in Lhasa — “There are probably two important messages to go out: one is the need for restraint on all sides and, secondly, that substantive dialogue is the only way forward” (report, Mar 15) — are typical of the morally spineless position that the international community continues to take towards China’s human rights record and repression of minorities.
What has happened in Lhasa is clearly not six of one and half a dozen of the other, but a brutal suppression of a protest of a repressed minority. While diplomacy is called for, it has many faces, and there are times when an unambiguous and publicly declared condemnation can be more effective than behind-closed-doors “dialogue”.
Sending a clear message of what is an acceptable way for China to treat its citizens will neither lead to confrontation nor harm Britain’s economic interests. On the contrary, it may gradually increase the cost for an increasingly outward-looking Government to continue flagrantly to abuse human rights domestically and act amorally in relation to Darfur. It is time that the international community took the opportunity offered by the Beijing Olympics and proclaimed China’s human rights record at home and abroad to be what it is: appalling.
Dr Alexander Betts
Wadham College, Oxford
Sir, The “Fire on the Roof” (leading article, Mar 15) has only just started. Ever since China won the right to stage the Olympics, it was predictable that the occasion would unite all the dissident elements against the regime to stage a spectacular show embarrassing the Chinese authorities.
So far, we’ve had Steven Spielberg and Mia Farrow against China in Darfur, the Prince of Wales and the British athletes who wish to express dissent at the Olympics and now the populace of Lhasa expressing its anger.
Yet to come are the Falun Gong. If I know them well, they would stage a spectacular suicide or shooting in Beijing of one of their number by Chinese guards in front of 50,000 media people from around the world.
One would hope that the Government of Taiwan would not choose this year to tweak mainland China’s forbearence.
The world needs to recall the Moscow Olympics of 1980. It is likely, though not by any means certain, that a similar flurry of boycotts would face China.
How the Chinese Government responds to those events will be a test of how ready China is for the 21st century.
Lord Desai
House of Lords
Sir, It is a mistake to view the suffering of the Tibetan people as merely a “human rights” issue — it is far more than that. As a matter of international law, the position is unambiguously clear: Tibet is an independent sovereign nation under illegal foreign occupation. China committed an act of aggression in invading Tibet in 1950, and has remained there ever since, in occupation, against the wishes of Tibetans, governing the country with all the characteristics of an oppressive colonial administration.
By any definition Tibetans are a “people” under international law, and are therefore entitled to the right of self-determination. The 1993 London Statement issued by dozens of independent international legal experts is definitive. The legal, and ethical, case on behalf of the Tibetans is unarguable.
The world has stood by and allowed Tibetans to become an insignificant minority in their own country and to suffer unimaginable brutality. It is shameful that it takes violence to bring this issue to the world’s attention.
Nicholas Orosz
London SW18
