Hi guest, Register | Login | Contact Us
Welcome to Phayul.com - Our News Your Views
Mon 02, May 2016 02:51 AM (IST)
Search:     powered by Google
2016 ELECTION RESULT
 MENU
Home
News
Photo News
Opinions
Statements &
Press Releases

Book Reviews
Movie Reviews
Interviews
Travels
Health
Obituaries
News Discussions
News Archives
Download photos from Tibet
 Latest Stories
After Uygur leader, Chinese dissidents denied Indian visa to attend democracy event
Survey shows 75 percent foreign media still denied entry into "TAR"
Dalai Lama hosts interactive discussion on Indian Philosophy and Modern Sciences
Sikyong launches book by former MP
Tibetan writer, her Chinese husband put under house arrest
Tibetan immigrant workers in Canada protest against wage discrimination
Tilda Swinton cast as ‘Ancient One’ to appeal to Chinese audience
Meeting of Tibetan, Uyghur delegates to take place behind closed doors, Pressure from China likely cause?
Lobsang Sangay elected PM for second term
Education with good heart leads to happiness: Dalai Lama
 Latest Photo News
Lawmakers from the Czech conservative opposition TOP 09 and former foreign minister Karel Schwarzenberg (left) hang Tibetan national flags from the windows of the Chamber of Deputies to oppose Chinese President Xi Jingping's maiden visit to Czech Republic, March 29, 2016 Photo: ČTK Burian Michal
An elderly Tibetan prays before casting her ballot for the Tibetan elections 2016, Tsuglakhang, March 20, 2016. Phayul Photo: Kunsang Gashon
Monks participate in the Tsetor rituals of the Tibetan Losar, at the Tsuglakhang temple on the first day of the Tibetan Fire Monkey Year 2143. Theckchen Choeling, Feb. 9, 2016. Phayul Photo: Kunsang Gashon
more photos »
Advertisement
Can China be Trusted to Keep a Bargain?
By Email[Friday, May 11, 2012 02:36]
By the editorial board of The Tibetan Political Review

The bargain that the Obama administration thought it had made with China, regarding the fate of blind human rights legal advocate Chen Guangcheng, has now fallen apart. The New York Times reports that American officials admit to “bungling” the case. U.S. Congressman Frank Wolf scolded the administration for taking China’s promises at “face value.” CNN suggests that the U.S. was “naïve”, and the LA Times calls the situation a “diplomatic train wreck”.


As is now well known, Chen escaped a brutal 19-month house arrest in Shandong Province that was illegal even under Chinese law, fleeing hundreds of miles to the American Embassy in Beijing. He spent the next six days under the protection of American diplomats, who negotiated with the Chinese authorities for his safety.

Chen was emphatic in his desire to remain in China. He sought a deal where the Chinese government would promise him certain rights and freedoms (technically, no more than any Chinese citizen is due under the Chinese Constitution). China and the U.S. reached a deal where Chen would leave the Embassy, be reunited with his family, be restored his freedom, and allowed to study law in the city of Tianjin, far from Shandong Province.

Within hours of leaving American protection, however, Chen was saying that Chinese authorities were not honoring their agreement. He was isolated and intimidated by plainclothes police. It became clear to Chen that his safety, and the safety of his wife and two children, were in danger as long as they remained in China, regardless of China’s promises.

It is now reported that Chen will leave China for a fellowship at New York University, where noted Chinese legal scholar Jerry Cohen is based. (Chen’s ability to return to China has not been, and is unlikely to be, guaranteed.) President Obama is now facing withering criticism from human rights advocates and the Republican presidential candidate, who called it “a day of shame for the Obama administration”.


Why Did This Debacle Happen?

How could seasoned American diplomats have negotiated a deal that fell apart so quickly and so catastrophically, endangering the safety of an innocent person and his family, and sustaining political damage to President Obama as he kicks off his re-election campaign?

According to the CIA’s former top China analyst, Christopher Johnson, the administration was so focused on the “opportunity for a tactical victory” that they neglected the “possible strategic downside.” Essentially, they let hope overcome reason.

University of California Professor Yang Su, writing for CNN, noted that the deal “sounded like a win-win solution” because it would resolve the problem and allow China to save “face”. But, he continued, “[t]hose who have intimate knowledge of China and its political system had reasons to worry.” He explained that “[i]n many ways, the deal was almost made to be broken, because it was based on three erroneous assumptions on the part of American officials.” In particular, “[t]he American trust that the Chinese government will honor its promises was misplaced, if not outright naïve.”


What Lesson, if Any?

American diplomats apparently went into this negotiation naïvely hoping for a “win-win” arrangement, supposedly based on the Chinese Constitution. They let their hope overcome reason, ignoring the fact that the Chinese government has shown itself untrustworthy in abiding by its promises. In a country without rule of law, contracts and negotiations will always risk falling through. And as Jerry Cohen said on NPR, China is undergoing “a crisis of lawlessness.” Consequently, the deal that American diplomats thought they had negotiated so deftly has blown up in their faces. China has proven willing to lie to the other side’s negotiators, and then renege on the deal once China gets what it wants (in this case, to pry Chen away from American protection).

Chen did not want to leave China. He wanted a deal allowing him to live in freedom within China. But unfortunately, the Chinese government apparently considered a single blind legal advocate too much of a “threat” to tolerate, and that it was worth serious fall-out with the U.S. to eliminate this “threat”. Chen ultimately concluded that he could only find freedom outside of Chinese rule.

One of the most urgent and cutting questions in Chen Guangcheng’s case has been raised by the International Campaign for Tibet (ICT). ICT asks:

“…it appears that the Chinese from the outset were not willing to live up to the assurances that the U.S. said it had negotiated. This raises a fundamental question: if the Chinese cannot be trusted a deal [sic] on the fate of one individual, how trustworthy can they be on the agreements sought by the U.S. government within the Strategic and Economic Dialogue?”

ICT asks an excellent question about the Chinese government's trustworthiness, one that should be addressed by all who advocate trusting the People’s Republic of China to abide by any agreement it might make.

Article submitted by the editorial board of the Tibetan Political Review.

The views expressed in this piece are that of the author and the publication of the piece on this website does not necessarily reflect their endorsement by the website.
Print Send Bookmark and Share
  Readers' Comments »
sad (Dralha)
The deal (omze)
Your Comments

 More..
Humans of New York: Tibetan diaspora
Tribute to Desung Kalon Dongchung Ngodup: by Chung Tsering
THE WECHAT EFFECT ON 2016 TIBETAN GENERAL ELECTIONS
Response to Dr. Dhondup Tashi and Dr. Desel's article
LET'S FIGHT REAL DISEASE FIRST
Are we headed to “Democracy with Dharamsala characteristics”?
Why I won’t vote in the Final Sikyong Election
Sikyong elections - Reimagining Doeguling Tibetan Settlement
Five Suggestions for Improving the Tibetan Electoral Process
Tyranny of the Tibetan Majority
Advertisement
Advertisement
Photo Galleries
Advertisement
Phayul.com does not endorse the advertisements placed on the site. It does not have any control over the google ads. Please send the URL of the ads if found objectionable to editor@phayul.com
Copyright © 2004-2016 Phayul.com   feedback | advertise | contact us
Powered by Lateng Online
Advertisement