China strongly objects to US report criticizing China's human rights
China is firmly opposed to a US State Department report criticizing
China's human rights situation without any reason,
<http://www.fmprc.gov.cn/eng/>Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Liu
Jianchao said Wednesday in
<http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/province/beijing.html>Beijing.
He made the remarks when asked to comment on the Country Reports on Human
Rights Practices released by the US in Washington Monday.
"Only the Chinese people themselves have the right to comment on the human
rights situation in their own country."
"The Chinese government, sticking to a policy it calls 'putting people
above everything else,' has made many efforts toward building a democratic
country under the rule of law," Liu said. "As a result, the Chinese people
are now enjoying an improved situation in terms of human rights."
Liu said he hoped the
<http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/usa.html>United States would put
more focus on its own human rights problems and work harder to resume the
China-US human rights dialogue and benefit bilateral exchanges.
China to issue human rights record of the United States
The Information Office of the State Council will issue on March 3 the
Human Rights Record of the United States in 2004, in response to the
Country Reports on Human Rights Practices issued by the United States,
which irrationally condemns human rights in China.
It will be the sixth Chinese report in response to the annual country
reports on human rights by the United States in six consecutive years.
The Human Rights Record of the United States in 2004, based on plenty of
facts, is divided into six parts, uncovering the bad records of the United
States concerning the invasions into other countries and the mistreatment
of foreign inmates, as well as the bad records in the aspects of life,
freedom and personal security of the US citizens, their political rights
and freedom, economic, social and cultural rights, racial discrimination,
conditions of women and children.
Anyone who poses threats shall bear responsibility
At the beginning of this year, Washington's "China threat" theory was
heard everywhere. For a while there was filled with confused voices in the
Capitol Hill about canceling China's permanent normal trade status and
resuming "diplomatic ties" with
<http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/province/taiwan.html>Taiwan. What
is more noteworthy is that the
<http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/usa.html>United States is speeding
up its actual plans for containment against China.
First, bogged down in the quagmire in the Middle East, Washington has
stepped up drawing
<http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/data/japan.html>Japan together with it
to contain China, so as to cope with the situation of shortage in its
global troops disposition. On February 19, the US-Japan Security
Consultation Committee issued a joint statement, for the first time openly
listing the Taiwan Straits as a "common strategic objective" of the two
nations. As US media put it, this is the most significant turn since the
United States and Japan entered into a security alliance, and also a grave
provocation to China that will lead to a rapid deterioration of
China-Japan political relations.
Second, whipping up opinion, Washington plays up and exaggerates China's
military strength and creates an atmosphere of tension across the Straits,
with the aim of roping Taiwan into passing the arms purchase plan, and
foots the bill for US military interest groups. News also came out
recently that the United States, Japan and Taiwan would jointly play the
game of a military drill.
Third, the United States intimidates the EU for its intention to lift arms
embargo on China, turning a question of eliminating political
discrimination into one of military security.
Fourth, the United States remains suspicious of business affairs in
China-US relations, turning business deals between enterprises into
national security concerns, such as the case of Lenovo's purchase of IBM's
PC department.
Dragging Japan into involvement in the issue of the Taiwan Straits is a
move openly provoking China's core national interest, an act that runs
counter to US clear-cut commitments made in the process of establishing
diplomatic ties with China and a move that may shake the political
foundation of Sino-US ties. Despite the "ambiguous" and "mild" wording
used in the US-Japan "Joint Statement", people with discerning eyes can
clearly see its implications. Taiwan has reportedly responded to the
statement with "extreme excitement". The sovereignty ownership of Taiwan
is the core of China's national interest, and it is impossible for China
to swallow the bitter fruit of any act that damages the integrity of
China's sovereignty. Any action of conniving at "Taiwan independence" will
mean inciting tension and war flames across the Taiwan Straits.
There have always been two tendencies in America's formulation of its
China policy, one holding China as a "potential rival" that must be
contained by all means; the other believing that China's momentous
development is irresistible, so the only way to follow is to induce China
to properly play a "responsible" and "constructive" role. Washington's
China policy carried out in recent years has been a combination of the
two. US lately acts toward China are many-way containment in reality, and
inducement in wording.
To be "constructive" has always been a two-way practice in interstate
relations. If a country, breaking its promise or going back on its words,
adopts an irresponsible attitude in willfully provoking and harming the
fundamental national interest of another country, and yet it asks the
latter to take a "responsible" and "constructive" attitude, how is this
possible? The United States should understand this elementary truth.
In fact, it is the United States that should carefully consider the
question of a "responsible" and "constructive" attitude. Adhering to a
one-China stand and making an explicit statement that "Taiwan is not an
independent sovereign state" is a "constructive" attitude. But one must
act as what one has said and must not play fast and loose, saying one
thing today and doing another thing tomorrow. The United States has
repeatedly expressed its opposition to a unilateral change in the status
quo of the Taiwan Straits, but what is the status quo of the Straits? The
most fundamental status quo of the Taiwan Straits is: Under the consensus
on "the two sides belonging to one and the same China", the Taiwan Straits
has avoided military conflicts and has begun exchanges. Challenging the
one-China principle and consensus is unilaterally changing the status quo
across the Straits, is disrupting the tacit agreement of peace reached
between the two sides and is creating trouble and stirring up war. The
United States should have clear formulations about this.
This article by Huang Qing is carried on the third page of the Global
Times, February 28, and translated by People's Daily Online
James M. Craven
Blackfoot Name: Omahkohkiaayo-i'poyi
Professor/Consultant,Economics;Business Division Chair
Clark College, 1800 E. McLoughlin Blvd.
Vancouver, WA. USA 98663
Tel: (360) 992-2283; Fax: (360) 992-2863
"The people who cast the votes decide nothing.
The people who count the votes decide everything."
Josef Stalin
<http://www.aradicalblackfoot.blogspot.com/>http://www.aradicalblackfoot.blogspot.com
Employer has no association with private/protected opinion
FREE LEONARD PELTIER!!