Beyond Tibet, how should or could the west intervene in Chinese human rights?

I personally dont believe China is prepared to grant sovereignty to Tibet any time soon. If it did, that would not conceivably do much for human rights reform in China as a whole. We the west see no reason why China shouldnt be seen to be cleaning up their act and allow people the basic liberties we take for granted. Without defending the Chinese reigime Id like to highlight a difference between here and the east. A large part of human rights consists of workers rights. Workers in China as we know are treated extremely poorly. Infact, a major reason China is becoming an economic superpower is its cheap labour costs. Therefore, to the Chinese government, granting western rights to these people will result in powerful unions [of many many millions] which would decrease the countries global competitiveness through demand for much pay increase.

Update:

Therefore, is the longterm economic success of the west in part due to the industrial revolution arriving long before the unions gradually gained the power to allow people strike?

The richest western corporations which we support will always look for the cheapest most underprivilaged workers to make our products competitively. They will say that they must do so to survive in the global economy. Therefore, we too sponsor and benefit economically from the poor workers situation in China. What can we realistically do to encourage reform in China?

Sighting the 'freeing' of Iraq as an example of western naivity towards the longterm evolutionary process required for a creating a stable and free society; doesnt it figure that you cant just dish out civil rights in an environment which is incapable of upholding them?

Update 2:

mandurahmum: I agree to a point, but we all buy products which contain many parts manufactured in China, computers, cars, televisions etc etc..

6 Answers

Relevance
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Tibet is not considered soverign by any country, the UN or the Dali Lama himself. China has 3 autonomous regions (we call ours territories) and they have a right to put down rebellions in as much as we do and we have done so in the past.

    There is your answer on Tibet.

    As far as the west intervening in China's internal affairs, it is up to China to decide, not us. What we fail to do is give them credit for making great strides forward in giving their people more personal freedom then anytime in their history. We demand instant change. We've seen how instant change is like in Countries that have never had our style of governing before.

    China has made a pledge to the world that they would not invade a sovereign country. They also believe in a sovereign countries right to self determination. Obviously the USA doesn't hold such lofty ideals.

    ===============

    Life is so simple, but we insist on making it complicated

    Confucius

    551 - 479 BC

    ===============

    Peace

    Jim

    .

    • Login to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    There's a difference between could and should. The West COULD intervene by boycotting the Olympics, cancelling trade agreements, trying to pass UN resolutions, invasion by air, land or sea, "nuking 'em".

    There are many arguments about the wisdom of boycotting sports events, and I'm not going into them here. Cancelling trade agreements would run the risk of losing access to a huge market for our goods, and losing the opportunity to buy cheap manufactured goods, increasing the costs for our firms, leading to price rises and business closures happening in the West. UN resolutions? Does China have a veto? How many resolutions have been passed about the illegal occupation of Palestinian land? Did they help? Invasion is a non-starter. China is huge with an experienced military force. Not as big as the USA of course, but from our experience with Iraq, a country like China would be impossible to quash. Nuking 'em would do nothing for human rights in the country, and of course would merit reprisal.

    SHOULD the West intervene? The answer to that is a big fat no. It is heresy I know, but the western way of life is not the only way to live. The West has its own human rights issues, and there are unacceptable levels of poverty in the most developed Western country.

    You don't want us to mention Iraq but you do mention basic human rights. By that I assume you mean freedom of speech, rights to vote, rights to demonstrate. Personally I would prefer the right to go out shopping safely, the right to go to school and the right to go out in the street without fear of being blown up or shot. These are basic rights that have gone out the window for Iraqis since the West invaded to improve their lives, introduce democracy, and of course eradicate non-existent weapons of mass destruction.

    Diplomacy is slow and unsexy but gentle pressure, and leading by example would be a better and more successful way to influence change.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    heres a book that shows why the west wont intervene...

    http://www.amazon.com/Year-Without-Made-China-Adve...

    It's not political will that's the problem with the world. It's that liberal democracy does not work. People are in many ways naturally selfish but they don't channel that selfishness into positive action. If global warming is genuine then it's democracy that's caused it. The West is so smug about how great our form of government is but we've caused more damage to the planet than any other form of human society (even if global warming isn't true we're still wiping out species after species). It would be quite ironic if our supposed highest form of society saw us wiped out.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    I personally dont buy products that are made in china. I think the best way for the citizens of the world to make china change its ways is to stop supporting them financially.

    I would never buy a child's product made in china again - after the lead paint and bindeez scares.

    • Login to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Jim B
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    Why should we intervene in China? If we were to do so it would just be like Iraq, everyone would support it for a while and would then tire of it, and turn on our own people just as we have ever since Korea! We all forget that freedom does not come free!!

    • Login to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    china is after Tawian next(watch this space)

    • Login to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.