| Someone Predicted the Political Spin on CNOOC-Nexen Deal. Oh Right, That Was Me. Posted: 25 Jul 2012 01:22 AM PDT Yesterday's post on the CNOOC-Nexen energy deal included a prediction that U.S. politicians, particularly those who are in the pocket of the oil and gas industry, would use the announcement to bash President Obama. My post title, "Who Lost Canada?" was all about the expected blame game. Surprise! Just saw this in Reuters: Republican senators will unveil new energy legislation on Thursday that will help battle a new move by China to tap North American energy resources, Senator John Hoeven said. China's state-owned oil company CNOOC Ltd. launched a $15.1 billion takeover bid for Canada's Nexen Inc , a company with operations in the Gulf of Mexico as well as in Canada's oilsands. Hoeven said the deal shows the United States needs to do more to aggressively develop its own resources. "If we don't get going on it, China's already moving. He who hesitates has lost," Hoeven told Reuters. Hoeven said he believes the CNOOC-Nexen deal is a "direct result" of President Barack Obama's January decision to delay approval of the Keystone XL pipeline, designed to bring oil from Canada's oilsands to Texas refineries.
I humbly submit that I nailed it. Who is Senator Hoeven? He's from North Dakota, the state where the Keystone Pipeline dips down into the U.S. He's been aggressive and outspoken on this project for a long time. And just in case you wanted to connect all the dots here, Hoeven's top campaign contributors are energy companies, with the oil and gas sector being #1 overall as compared to other types of businesses. That's how the game is played. Except that it isn't a game, and this whole thing depresses me.
© Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: CNOOC, Nexen, oil and gas, Senator Hoeven
|
| Famous Trademark Scam Lands Six Henan Judges in Jail Posted: 25 Jul 2012 12:23 AM PDT  If I wasn't so disgusted at how these people are tarnishing the image of China's legal system, and specifically intellectual property enforcement, I could almost admire the sheer inventiveness and chutzpah of this scam, which apparently is fairly common nationwide:
Legal experts say the Luoyang cases fit a nationwide pattern of courtroom hijackings by lawyers and judges who work with company executives to exploit a unique system in China that gives courts the power to enhance the value of any consumer product — even nationally distributed goods — by officially labeling it "famous."
There are several ways in China that a domestic trademark, or brand, can be designated as famous. There are official (i.e. government) lists that are generated at different levels, and which carry more or less weight. Then there are disputes, and the discretion of officials and judges to designate a trademark famous. For example, if you are a brand owner and apply to the Administrative of Industry and Commerce (AIC) for a raid against an infringer and the bad guy's products are in a slightly different classification, you may need to argue that your brand should be deemed well known and therefore deserving heightened protection. The AIC, for the purposes of that dispute, can make that determination. Similarly, a judge in a trademark infringement suit has the power to designate a mark well known. However, whether the AIC or a judge determines that a mark is well known, that designation does not carry over into any future dispute. In other words, that brand owner may have another case the following year and be required to make the same argument that it is well known, and in that instance, it would be possible for the official or judge to rule the other way. Despite the fact that well-known mark status is limited, apparently some companies find sufficient value in the one-time designation to participate in these scams. Here's how they work: Corrupt company executives get the game rolling by filing a trademark infringement lawsuit against a person hired to act as a "defendant" charged with hurting its brand image. Lawyers play along, and at least one judge accepts a payoff to rule in the plaintiff's favor and designate the product "famous," raising its market value.
Let's see. I've heard of fake lawsuits designed to cover up illegal fund transfers, including cross-border payments, and I'm also aware of fake divorces used for a variety of reasons, but I hadn't heard of these well-known brand cases before. Talk about an innovation society. This stuff really is creative. And yet, I really wonder if it's worth it. You have to pay off all the people involved in the scam, including lawyers and judges. And what does the brand owner get out of it? A piece of paper that includes reference to a well-known brand determination. Not even an official certificate or anything. I assume that the brand owners then go out and do a shitload of marketing post-lawsuit. Meh. Tons of companies in China do that; in fact so many do so, I for one tend to simply dismiss the claims. Moreover, I believe a lot of the advertising is simply false. Instead of participating in this elaborate scam, these brand owners could have just lied about their well-known status. Probably just as useful, and no threat of jail time. What will they think of next? Hopefully nothing. With these jerks running around, it makes it that much more difficult for all the honest lawyers and judges.
© Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: fake lawsuits, well-known trademark
|
| Photo: Men playing cards in Jing’an Park, Shanghai, by Remko Tanis Posted: 24 Jul 2012 07:40 PM PDT |
| Going Viral on Chinese Social Media Posted: 24 Jul 2012 07:37 PM PDT An episode of the Australian Broadcasting Corporation show Foreign Correspondent recently went viral on weibo, with 7.5 million clicks on a program about the "fu er dai" or rich second-generation. China correspondent Stephen McDonell talks to Jeremy Goldkorn of Danwei about social media in China and why McDonell's show spread so far so fast, especially considering it is not broadcast in China: JEREMY GOLDKORN: Social media has, perhaps for the first time in Chinese history, given every citizen a space where they can express themselves that really never used to exist in any institutionalised format. China's never had a very uncensored letters to the editors pages in its newspapers etc. and social media has given people a place to express themselves that is just unprecedented. STEPHEN MCDONELL: And on Weibo can you just talk about anything, or are there certain subjects completely off limits, or where are the lines? JEREMY GOLDKORN: People do try to talk about absolutely anything on Weibo but there are lots of subjects that you can't talk about. And most of the subjects that you can't talk about if you do start talking about them your postings get deleted and if you continue to talk about them your account may possibly be deleted. And this censorship is done by Sina, the company that controls Weibo, because they have to because their business licence is dependent on government approval of them, and the government expects them to make sure that the content is clean. But it is nonetheless remarkable, despite the censorship what a wide and vibrant range of discussion there is on Weibo about every issue imaginable of concern to the Chinese people.
© Sophie Beach for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: foreign media, Jeremy Goldkorn, sina weibo, social media, Twitter
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall
 |
| Cancer-causing Toxin Found in Chinese Baby Formula Posted: 24 Jul 2012 07:13 PM PDT China's scandal-ridden dairy industry is again the focus of public scrutiny. This time, aflatoxin, a cancer-causing element, was found in samples of Nanshan Bywise infant formula. From Reuters: Five batches of Nanshan Bywise infant milk powder produced between July and December last year failed sample tests for aflatoxin, a toxin produced by a fungus that is widespread in nature, the Guangzhou Industrial and Commercial Administration Bureau said in a statement issued last Friday. Hunan Ava Dairy, indirectly owned by a fund run by CITIC Capital, said in a statement on its website that it will recall all infant formula in question and halt production and distribution. The company said the source of the aflatoxin contamination was due to cows eating moldy feed.
And this is just a tip of the iceberg compared to the massive scandals in China's food industry. Mark Mcdonald at the New York Times looks into how the country's food-safety mess that has caused nationwide panic: Rendezvous recently explored the food-safety mess in China, where baby formula is just one of the hot-button issues. Imitation soy sauce has been made from hair clippings, ink and paraffin are used to dress up cheap noodles, and pork buns get so loaded with bacteria that they glow in the dark. There's formaldehyde on the cabbages. There's chlorine in the soft drinks. There's chromium in the gelatin capsules. […] In the 2008 melamine scandal, various milk products, notably baby formula and milk powder, were found to contain melamine, an industrial additive used to make fertilizer and industrial piping. Dairy producers were using the melamine to make their milk appear to have higher protein levels than it actually did.
Read more about China's food safety issues via CDT.
© Mengyu Dong for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: children's health, dairy industry, food safety, milk contamination
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall
 |
| The Stylish Side of China Posted: 24 Jul 2012 07:07 PM PDT Although some analysts are worried about a slowdown in China's economy, including the luxury industry, some indicators tell a different story. As huge numbers of people, white-collar women in typical, have just entered the middle class, a keen desire for fashion products props up the high-end consumption market. From New York Times: Many Chinese women will spend far more of their income than their Western counterparts on these magazines and the products featured inside them. According to a 2011 study conducted by Bain & Company, mainland China ranked sixth in the world for spending on luxury goods ranked by country. In 2010, it was a $17.7 billion market. Louis Vuitton, Chanel and Gucci remain the most desired luxury brands. […] Lena Yang, general manager of Hearst Magazines China, who oversees nine publications including Elle and Marie Claire, says that the typical reader of Hearst Magazines in China is a 29.5-year-old woman who is more likely to be single than married. She has an average income of about $1,431 a month and spends $938 a season on luxury watches, $982 on handbags and shoes and $1,066 on clothes.
Meanwhile, movie producers in Hong Kong also found themselves contending with Louis Vuitton handbags. From Bloomberg: In real life, the Hong Kong film producer is losing the fight against a more insidious adversary: the luxury handbag. Gone are the days when landlords in Hong Kong used movie theaters as a way to draw visitors to malls, says Kong, executive director of Edko Films Ltd. "Now they say 'Get out, we want LV.'" No wonder, when a Louis Vuitton Monogram Empreinte Artsy MM bag sells for more than HK$20,000 ($2,578) in the city and mall owners get a share of the sale on top of rent.
Read more about luxury consumption in China via CDT.
© Mengyu Dong for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: conspicuous consumption, fashion, luxury, urban life
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall
 |
| Cyber Candles for Two Tragedies Posted: 24 Jul 2012 12:10 PM PDT  "Today, I light two candles: one for today, one for last year." Yesterday marked two tragedies in China: the third day of floods in the nation's capital and the one-year anniversary of the high-speed train crash in Wenzhou. Both appeared at first to be natural disasters, but are really man-made. In Wenzhou, railway officials first blamed a lightning strike for stopping one train over a bridge—another train crashed into it shortly after, killing 40 passengers and injuring at least 210. Five days later, researchers announced that faulty signalling was to blame. In Beijing this weekend, heavy rainfall overwhelmed the outdated system of water pipes. Poorer districts on the city's periphery are still in dire condition, and many fear the death toll is much higher than the official 37. The Rabble News, an online parody paper, posted this "front page" on Weibo July 23. Two mourning candles huddle together under an umbrella. "Today, I light two candles," reads the headline, "One for today, one for last year." Connecting the two events, especially by lighting commemorative cyber candles, is a provocative move in China's tightly controlled media space. Despite admitting to error and firing Railway Ministry officials, authorities have still barred reporters from visiting the site of the Wenzhou crash, and independent reporting on the anniversary was forbidden. Even journalists working for state-run media were chastised for criticizing the response to the disaster. Citizens are braced for cosmetic responses to the floods. Braced, but not complacent. People may expect lethal mistakes to be swept under the rug, but they are increasingly holding the government accountable. Weibo is the prime site of public anger at dismal infrastructure. People want to know how a city that hosted the world's most extravagant summer Olympics to date could neglect such basic city services, and how the efforts of individual Samaritans, while noble, could have no state parallel. Yao Bo, a well-known commentator, sighed on July 22, "The only thing that functioned properly last night were the people of Beijing." This is the crux of China's dilemma: under Deng Xiaoping, the Party made a pact with its people to provide prosperity and a better quality of life in exchange for perpetuating the authoritarian regime. Now the Party is failing in its end of the bargain.
© Anne.Henochowicz for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: Beijing, beijing flood 2012, chinternet, Chinternet meme, high-speed rail crash, meme, Rabble News, weibo, wenzhou, Wuyuesanren, Yao Bo
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall
 |
| Vietnam, Philippines Slam Garrison Plans Posted: 24 Jul 2012 10:06 AM PDT Despite the escalating tensions in the region due to the inconclusive ASEAN resolution, Xinhua reports that China has officially established Sansha city in the South China Sea, on an island that is partially claimed by Vietnam: China on Tuesday officially set up the city of Sansha on Yongxing Island in the southernmost province of Hainan. The national flag was hoisted while the national anthem played after the signboards of the Sansha Municipal Government and the Sansha Municipal Committee of the Communist Party of China (CPC) were unveiled. On Tuesday, 613 local residents living off fishing became official residents of Sansha. The newly elected city government has planned to make tourism one of three economic engines for the development of Sansha city, besides fishing and oil and gas exploration, according to Xia Jie, the city mayor elected on Monday.
CDT previously reported on China's plans to establish a military garrison on the disputed island . Vietnam and the Philippines have responded by slamming China's garrison plan. Aside from China's deployment of a military garrison, Navy warships have also been in the region. From AFP: Hanoi filed a formal protest with Beijing against the plan outlined by China this week to station troops in Sansha in the disputed Paracel Islands, saying it "violates international law". Manila, which is involved in a dispute over another archipelago, the Spratly Islands, also weighed into the row, summoning the Chinese ambassador to lodge a complaint against the garrison announcement. The disputes have become particularly acrimonious in recent weeks, with Vietnam and the Philippines criticising what they call Chinese encroachment. Beijing's garrison plan "violates international law, seriously violates Vietnam's sovereignty… and is invalid," Foreign Ministry spokesman Luong Thanh Nghi told AFP.
Amid Hanoi and Manila's protests, another AFP article reports that the International Crisis Group claims that an armed conflict is possible: Prospects of solving the disputes "seem to be diminishing" after a recent failure by the 10-nation ASEAN grouping to hammer out a "code of conduct" that would govern actions in the sea, the International Crisis Group (ICG) said. "Without a consensus on a resolution mechanism, tensions in the South China Sea can easily spill over into armed conflict," warned Paul Quinn-Judge, the ICG's program director for Asia. The Brussels-based ICG said in its report on Tuesday that China had "worked actively to exploit" the divisions in ASEAN by offering preferential treatment to members of the bloc that supported its position in the dispute. The ICG said the best way to ease the tensions would be for the rival claimants to agree on ways to share the natural resources on offer in the South China Sea.
As concern grows over China's increasing military presence in the South China Sea, China has showed foreign media its military helicopters in a bid for transparency, according to Reuters: China organises annual tours of military bases to try to assuage those concerns and to answer criticism over a perceived lack of transparency, but officials refused to answer any contentious questions. While the Defence Ministry announced over the weekend it would set up a formal military garrison for the South China Sea, officers accompanying reporters to the Tongzhou base in Beijing's far east avoided the issue. "Our military's aim is to protect peace. The training exercises we carry out are normal and in line with what we always do," Zhang Zhilin, the jocular commander of the Army Aviation 4th Helicopter Regiment, told reporters. "Do you really think we're not transparent? Actually we're extremely transparent," Defence Ministry spokesman Geng Yansheng told reporters on the base's sun-baked concrete apron, brushing off such remarks.
© Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: maritime boundaries, maritime disputes, philippines, sansha, South China Sea, transparency, Vietnam
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall
 |
| WTO to Probe China’s Rare-Earth Policies Posted: 24 Jul 2012 10:02 AM PDT After the request by the European Union, Japan, and the United States for the World Trade Organization to examine China's rare-earth industry, the WTO will probe into China's rare-earth policies, from AFP: The decision was taken at a meeting of the trade arbiter's Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) after a request by the European Union, the United States and Japan. An earlier call for DSB arbitration was blocked on July 10 by China, which is accused of unfairly choking off exports of rare earths, tungsten and molybdenum to benefit domestic industries. The US claims that China sets export quotas, duties and other restrictions that make the products increasingly expensive. In response China's WTO delegation said it "regrets that the complaining parties request the DSB to establish a panel on these disputes for a second time", adding that its policies "are aimed at protecting natural resources and achieving sustainable economic development".
According to the Wall Street Journal, the WTO's investigation can only have a limited impact on the prices of rare-earth minerals: But coming at a time when global production is rising and prices are under pressure, the findings of the trade body can only have limited impact on prices as the world no longer relies on Chinese supply for all its needs. After China imposed quota restrictions on exports, global suppliers have made considerable headway in reducing dependence on Chinese supply. U.S.-based Molycorp has begun production at its California mine, and Avalon Rare Metals(AVL-0.71%)is developing a deposit in Canada's Northwest Territories, according to a U.S. Congress research report in June. Japan also has a deal for a rare-earth development project in Quebec, and Australia's Lynas Corp.(LYC.AU -0.62%) is due to start mine production at its Mount Weld facility this year as well as potentially reopen a mine in South Africa.
While the world is becoming less dependent on the Chinese supply of rare-earth elements, China Daily reports that exports to South Korea surged in June: China's rare earth exports to South Korea surged last month due to a fall in export prices, Korean customs data showed Tuesday. South Korea purchased a total of 126 metric tons of rare earth material from China in June, up 36.3 percent from a month earlier, according to the Korea Customs Service. In terms of value, rare earth export to South Korea edged down 0.4 percent on-month to $3.8million in June, indicating that falling export prices contributed mainly to the June surge. Meanwhile, magnesium exports to South Korea soared 73.3 percent on-month to 903 tons in June, but tungsten exports declined 24.8 percent to 36 tons. Cobalt exports to the country expanded 39.2 percent to 436 tons over the cited period.
Aside from being multilaterally confronted over its rare-earth policies, China is also dealing with the issue of illegal mines, which was covered in the white paper published on rare earths. Bloomberg adds: While China has yet to change its policies on raw materials to comply with that ruling, there has been speculation that it will scrap the tariffs and instead impose domestic taxes on mining. In what may have been an effort to buttress its argument, the Chinese government issued its first white paper on rare- earth industry policies on June 20, describing how a lack of proper regulations has led to excessive mining and environmental degradation in China. The government promised an extensive cleanup and a crackdown on illegal mines. As in the raw-materials case, the three complaining governments say the curbs on rare earths violate paragraph 11.3 of China's accession protocol requiring the country to scrap all taxes and charges on exports unless specifically provided for in Annex 6. While Annex 6 allows China to impose export duties on 84 tariff lines up to a specified limit, none of the rare earths or metals at issue are included on that list. Once the WTO panel is established, judges have six months to issue their report, which all parties can then appeal.
Read more about rare-earth elements in China and their environmental cost, via CDT.
© Melissa M. Chan for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: EU, Japan, rare earth elements, rare metals, United States, WTO
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall
 |
| The Daily Twit – 7/24/12: More Storm Fallout, and China Takes Off to the Great White North Posted: 24 Jul 2012 04:32 AM PDT Two big issues getting a lot of attention today. First, we're still seeing a huge amount of commentary and recriminations over the Beijing flooding. Check out these links, and keep in mind that the weather forecast is for more rain over the next few days: Wall Street Journal: Hong Kong vs. Beijing: A Tale of Two Storms — Hong Kong just experienced a major typhoon, with none of the problems experienced by Beijing. I think that's to be expected, given normal weather patterns, but some folks are not happy at all. Caixin: No Excuse for Response to Beijing Storm — Does Beijing run into this problem on a regular basis? The Useless Tree: The Politics of Rain in Beijing — Government legitimacy and infrastructure. Xinhua: China issues flood emergency response — Flooding is not just a Beijing problem. The second big story, and number one in terms of international coverage, was the blockbuster Nexen-CNOOC oil deal: China Hearsay: Who Lost Canada? America's Neighbors turn to China for Energy Deal — My reaction to the deal and what the U.S. political reaction might be. MarketWatch: Cnooc-Nexen deal faces long approval process — Why this deal should be easier to obtain approval in Canada than the recent BHP rejection. Forbes: Nexen Deal: Why North America Is The New Middle East — China diversifies its global energy assets. Wall Street Journal: Chinese Oil M&A – Who's Next, Where Next? — There are more transactions in the "pipeline." A couple other interesting items: China Daily: Call for changes to inheritance law — Some estates are reverting to the state because the scope of current law is too narrow in terms of family members who may inherit. Bloomberg: China Shadow Bankers Go Online as Peer-to-Peer Sites Boom — Obviously there is a need for credit here, but without rigorous regulation, we're also seeing a lot of scams. Answer: more financial sector reforms! East Asia Forum: Russia: between the US and China — Russia as a key "swing state" between two geopolitical poles. Global Times: Lawyer sues Japan over Diaoyu Bid — If you're looking for a good belly laugh, read this story of a genuine frivolous lawsuit, filed by a lawyer who doesn't deserve a license employed by a firm that I regret working for in the past. {sigh}
© Stan for China Hearsay, 2012. | Permalink | No comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags:
|
| Eric X. Li vs Minxin Pei on China and Democracy Posted: 24 Jul 2012 03:14 AM PDT The Aspen Institute has posted the full video of a debate from its Ideas Festival, which ran from June 27th and July 3rd. The discussion pitched venture capitalist Eric X. Li against professor of government Minxin Pei on the subject of "China and Democracy", moderated by James Fallows. Fallows advised readers of his Atlantic blog to look out for the debate shortly after it took place: The formal topic of discussion was "China and Democracy"; in effect, it was a debate about whether China was nearing the limits of its current authoritarian single-party guided-growth model, or whether it was still gathering steam and had plenty of success still ahead. I am biased, because the subject is of great interest to me and because I was on stage as moderator / referee. But I thought this was an unusually clear, informed, and vigorous airing of contrary views on China's present and future. They pretty much agreed about its past. Seriously, if you would like the most concise introduction to the case for concern about China's development, you can listen to Minxin Pei's side of the argument in this 80-minute (including audience Q&A) discussion. If you would like an unusually forthright statement of the "China knows best, and don't lecture us when you have such troubles of your own" perspective, listen to Eric Li — and watch the way they parry each other's arguments. "Debates" at high-toned conferences are often something more like polite seminars. This was an actual contest of views, perfectly civil but with no softening of the hard edges of disagreement. Check it out.
A show of hands suggested that few in the audience had been swayed from their initial positions by the end, but that more had swung towards Li than away from him. Asked by an audience member whether a similar conversation could take place in Beijing, he insisted that it could, though many others could not. But, he said, he wanted to "break the spell of so-called freedom of speech": "speech is act", he said, it "has harmed since time immemorial", and should be managed and regulated accordingly. Pei also said that the conference could take place in Beijing, but that the US government would have to rescue him immediately afterwards. J J Gould summarised the arguments at The Atlantic, and the complete video is embedded below. See also past articles by Minxin Pei and Eric X. Li, via CDT.
© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012. | Permalink | One comment | Add to del.icio.us
Post tags: chinese communist party, Chinese democracy, democracy, eric x. li, freedom of speech, James Fallows, Minxin Pei
Download Tools to Circumvent the Great Firewall
 |
| US-China Human Rights Talks Begin in Washington Posted: 24 Jul 2012 01:56 AM PDT The US State Department has promised to raise issues including labour rights, rule of law, freedom of religion and expression and the cases of Chen Guangcheng and Tibet during two-day annual rights talks that began in Washington on Monday. From AFP: "We consider that this is an integral part of all of the work we do to try to build a strong partnership and cooperation across the board with China," State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland told reporters. "We are always, whether it's at the presidential level, the secretarial level, or at this working group level, raising not only individual cases, but our concerns about rule of law, justice for individuals, equality, Tibet." She added that being able to talk forthrightly about human rights in all of its aspects" showed that the US relationship with China was "maturing."
The Chinese Foreign Ministry released a statement saying that "China is willing to discuss and exchange views on human rights issues with the United States on the basis of equality and mutual respect." Issues it will bring to the table, based on China's 2012 Human Rights Record of the United States, may include US military actions and drone strikes, the shootings of Trayvon Martin and cinema-goers in Aurora, and persistently high unemployment. Human rights organisations expressed scepticism at the value of the talks, arguing that they simply provide a fig leaf for continued abuses and stalled reforms in China. From Human Rights Watch, for example: "The crisis of self-immolations by Tibetans, stalled legal reform, and the latest disingenuous 'human rights action plans,' have been put on the agenda by the US," said Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch. "But another round of exchanges, particularly if there is no public discussion of the talks afterward, will allow the Chinese government to say it is engaging on rights issues while putting off necessary reforms that create a country with the rule of law and respect for basic rights." […] Many of the United States' and other governments' past human rights dialogues with China have been largely a rhetorical shell, lacking in accountability, transparency, and clear benchmarks for progress. The Chinese government often points to these dialogues as a human rights "deliverable," an end in itself, or insists that human rights issues can only be discussed in the context of a dialogue. None of the governments that pursue these dialogues with the Chinese government have established benchmarks to ensure meaningful progress.
Similarly, from Chinese Human Rights Defenders: With so many rounds of the human rights dialogue having preceded the one that will begin on Monday, Chinese Human Rights Defenders (CHRD) asks what, if anything, has been achieved by these talks? Are there any tangible results or positive outcomes that the US government can point to? Or is the only "result" merely the convening of the dialogue? CHRD strongly believes that a systematic and public assessment of the usefulness of these dialogues is long overdue. Indeed, some Chinese human rights advocates have told CHRD that they do not expect the human rights dialogue to bring about tangible benefits since, in their opinion, the Chinese government has no interest in improving human rights and faces little pressure to do more than just "enter into dialogue." Still, the talks could be a useful endeavor if they were more open to members of China's civil society. For example, some activists have suggested that the dialogue take into account views and ideas of Chinese human rights activists, and that officials from both countries should hold press conferences and respond to questions at the end of the dialogue.
In a Global Times interview on Sino-Australian rights talks held earlier this month, Shanghai Institute for International Studies research fellow Xue Lei argued that dialogue could indeed be considered an end in itself, and cited Beijing's recent National Human Rights Action Plan as a more tangible result of rights dialogue. The purpose of human rights dialogue is to reduce the lack of understanding through communication and exchanges. From this perspective, the continuation of the dialogue itself could be regarded as a kind of outcome. […] Objectively speaking, various dialogue mechanisms have contributed to some extent to human rights protection in China. One critical aspect is to promote the convergence in concepts and discourses on human rights between China and international community. Recently the Chinese government published its National Human Rights Action Plan (2012-15). It can be seen by a quick glance at the table of contents that the whole human rights discourse in China is conforming to the system for international protection of human rights established by various international covenants and treaties. And human rights dialogue has also led to institutional improvement in certain areas, for instance, in the area of criminal justice.
Human Rights Watch's Phelim Kine, however, argued that the new action plan actually marks "a step backward for universal rights protection" and, like the rights international dialogues, lacks real substance. [The plan] reiterates the Chinese government's existing public position that it "respects the principle of universality of human rights." However, the "principle of practicality" places limits on the government's enforcement of those rights by stating that it "also upholds [those rights] proceeding from China's national conditions and new realities to advance the development of its human rights cause on a practical basis." The absence of any criteria for "national conditions," "new realities" or a "practical basis" for universal rights enforcement effectively renders this "principle" little more than an opt-out clause. […] The new NHRAP, which is supposed to run through 2015, mirrors its predecessor's ambiguous statements of intent unsupported by any concrete measures for enforcement. Although the plan's civil and political rights section calls for "preventing unnecessary detention" through judicial review of the legal necessity of such incarceration, it provides no mechanisms or guidelines to ensure that Chinese government officials and security agencies adhere to possible recommendations for detainee release.
© Samuel Wade for China Digital Times (CDT), 2012 |
Comments