What's new

Hu Jintao questioned by Barack Obama on China's human rights record

luckyyy

SENIOR MEMBER
Joined
Sep 23, 2010
Messages
2,337
Reaction score
-1
president Hu Jintao was forced on the defensive today on the opening day of his state visit to the US, admitting for the first time in public that his country had to improve its human rights record.

Hu's visit, intended to improve relations between the two countries after a year of tensions over trade and diplomacy, was overshadowed by the human rights issue. It has been raised twice by Barack Obama in public, by US reporters at a press conference and by hundreds of demonstrators outside the White House.

It is the first state visit to the US by a Chinese leader in 13 years and, given China's rise in the intervening period to superpower status, there is lot riding on the outcome for both countries.

But at the joint Obama-Hu press conference, there was embarrassment for the Chinese leader when he claimed not to have heard a question from a US reporter who asked him to justify China's human rights record.

After listening to a translation of the question and of Obama's response, Hu completely ignored it. Later in the press conference, another US reporter asked him why he had not answered. Hu, laughing, claimed: "I would like to clarify. Because of the technical translation and interpretation problems, I did not hear the question about human rights."

The Chinese leader then went on to give a rare answer on human rights: "China is a developing country with a huge population, and also a developing country at a crucial stage of reform. In this context, China still faces many challenges in economic and social development. And a lot still needs to be done in China, in terms of human rights."

But he went on to remind Americans that while China is prepared to discuss human rights with the US, it would be on the basis of "mutual respect and the principle of non-interference in each other's internal affairs", basically it is a matter for China to decide.

It is unusual for a Chinese leader such as Hu to face a spontaneous press conference. Normally he restricts his remarks to scripted speeches.

China has an abysmal record on political dissent, as well as crackdowns on minorities such as Tibetans and Uighurs. Among high-profile prisoners is dissident Liu Xiaobo, the 2010 Nobel peace prize-winner.

Pro-Tibet groups and other demonstrators plan to follow Hu throughout his visit to Washington and later in the week to Chicago. Outside the White House and out of the hearing of Hu, about 200 people shouted "Killer, killer Hu Jintao".

They expected their numbers to double later for the carrying of a coffin round the White House to symbolise the death of the Chinese Communist party.

Although the US needs Chinese help in reviving its economy and with international issues such as North Korea and Iran, Obama did not shy away from the human rights issue. He raised it first at the welcoming ceremony on the White House lawn and again in a statement at the start of the press conference, at which he also called on China to engage with the Dalai Lama about Tibet.

Asked at the press conference about human rights, Obama said he had been very candid with Hu, telling him that although the countries are at different stages of development, "we have some core views as Americans about the universality of certain rights – freedom of speech, freedom of religion, freedom of assembly – that we think are very important and that transcend cultures."

Obama's raising of the issue twice in public may reflect a toughening of approach by the US towards China after what Washington sees as the failure of Beijing to respond to American overtures over the last two years.

"It is a slap in the face for Hu to raise human rights in the opening ceremony," said Nicholas Bequelin, a senior researcher with the Asia division of Human Rights Watch. He added that the Chinese side had done everything it could to avoid such embarrassment.

Elizabeth Economy, director of Asia studies at the US-based Council on Foreign Relations, said that Obama's remark would not necessarily be interpreted as a snub by Hu. "As both a winner of the Nobel peace prize and the president of the US, it was incumbent upon Obama to make such a statement, and I think he did it in a way that was clear and compelling without being insulting," she said.

Hu may view the public discussion of human rights as awkward and an embarrassment or may regard it as an opportunity at last to tackle an issue that is hurting China's global reputation. A clue will be provided by whether Chinese television and other official media report his remarks.

Hu may have liked to have got through the four-day visit without any reference to human rights and to have kept the focus instead on the pomp and ceremony associated with a state visit, the highlight of which was a state dinner scheduled at the White House for the evening.

But the visit was never going to go as smoothly as Hu would have liked. The Democratic leader in the Senate, Harry Reid, was provocative, describing Hu on as "a dictator". Reid has refused to attend the state dinner.

The new Republican house speaker, John Boehner, also declined to attend. Asked by a reporter about their absences, Hu said it was a matter for Obama.

Hu, as a sweetener to the US, came bearing gifts in the shape of $45bn (£28bn) in trade deals, almost half of which came in a promise to buy Boeing aircraft.


Hu Jintao questioned by Barack Obama on China's human rights record | World news | The Guardian
 
Ignoring the obvious intentions of the Indian thread starter...

Improving human rights is always a priority, as a country becomes more developed. The most important thing is to ensure that the people have enough food and water.

care to read the article........
 
care to read the article........

Yeah I was specifically commenting on this part:

The Chinese leader then went on to give a rare answer on human rights: "China is a developing country with a huge population, and also a developing country at a crucial stage of reform. In this context, China still faces many challenges in economic and social development. And a lot still needs to be done in China, in terms of human rights."

Do YOU have any comments on the article?
 
yes..sure !

" lot needs to be done in China, in terms of human rights."

I agree, a lot more needs to be done.

The order of priority is -> Food and water, stability, and safety, then opportunities for self-advancement and self-actualization.

Political liberalization will be slow, for the purposes of stability, but we will get there eventually. This is the "East Asian" model of development. Taiwan and South Korea for instance, developed economically under authoritarian regimes, then after development was complete, they went on the path of political liberalization.
 
yes..sure !
i was not aware that my comments are so valuable for you..

" lot needs to be done in China, in terms of human rights."

Well I find it funny that you didn't underline that in the article. How are we supposed to know what you wished to emphasis? Is the fact that the "brutal dictator" of China openly admitted that much could be done to improve China's human rights record too "radical" for you?
 
I agree, a lot more needs to be done.

The order of priority is -> Food and water, stability, and safety, then opportunities for self-advancement and self-actualization.

Political liberalization will be slow, for the purposes of stability, but we will get there eventually. This is the "East Asian" model of development. Taiwan and South Korea for instance, developed economically under authoritarian regimes, then after development was complete, they went on the path of political liberalization.

couldn't understand why you think Political liberalization will be slow, for the purposes of stability.......?

does political liberalization hampers the development and stability. ?

and how these two things political liberalization & development and stability are associated to over look human rights issues..?
 
couldn't understand why you think Political liberalization will be slow, for the purposes of stability.......?

Because that is the East Asian model of development, which most likely occurs, because East Asian countries tend to be very homogeneous in terms of culture and ethnicity.
 
Last edited:
does political liberalization hampers the development ?

Well, considering that China and India had the same GDP in 1990... and now China's economy is FOUR times bigger, and growing faster, you could argue that.

China has been growing at an average rate of 10% for the past three decades, which has made us into the 2nd largest economy on Earth. India meanwhile is not even in the top ten largest economies, and has never even reached double-digit growth... and we started from the same place.

Countries that are the most successful democracies, are the ones that are already developed, like the ones in Europe. On the other hand, "developing countries" that are democracies, face a lot of difficulty, like Nigeria, South Africa, Democratic Republic of Congo, etc.
 
Last edited:
Because that is the East Asian model of development, which most likely occurs, because East Asian countries tend to be very homogeneous in terms of culture and ethnicity.



Well, considering that China and India had the same GDP in 1990... and now China's economy is FOUR times bigger, and growing faster, you could argue that.

China has been growing at an average rate of 10% for the past three decades, which has made us into the 2nd largest economy on Earth. India meanwhile is not even in the top ten largest economies, and has never even reached double-digit growth... and we started from the same place.

ok , if in your view overlooking the human rights helping your ecomony ..then why explanation/disscussion..
 

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom