Graphic from @tibettruth
Only within the self-serving, delusional double-think of the United Nations would you witness a former journalist linked to an organization that administers China’s notorious and vicious population control program announce with dead-pan seriousness that:
“We need to hold all states accountable to the promises they made 20 years ago” Source: comments quoted by @liy
Fine words, but hang-on a minute this comes from no less than Ms Cai Piying formerly employed by the All Women’s Federation Of China a national body that overseas and assists in implementing forced sterilizations across China! She reportedly issued this demand at the current Beijing+20 meeting, convened by the United Nations to assess and progress the commitments of states who were signatories to the 1995 Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action
These documents clearly state governments should;
“Take all appropriate measures to eliminate harmful, medically unnecessary or coercive medical interventions…” and that “Acts of violence against women also include forced sterilization and forced abortion, coercive/forced use of contraceptives…” (section D, paragraph 115).
Given that China’s Regime has forcibly sterilized untold numbers of women since then, and continues to do so, the words of Ms Cai Piying are rather hollow, or should we say cynical in that her role within such meetings is no doubt to serve the disinformation objectives of her employers!
Examining the outcomes and statements thus far from Beijing+20 and already a number of concerns have been raised. Apart from the singular silence on the issue of China’s program of forced sterilizations, which has traumatized the lives of women in China, occupied Tibet and East Turkestan, the meeting has been seen by younger women as being out-of-touch, too willing to celebrate the supposed achievements of the Beijing Declaration of 1995 and failing to make genuine progress on a range of key issues, most notably reproductive and health rights.
Anyone genuinely dedicated to championing human rights will be dismayed by the lack of exposure and advancement of such issues. They will be disappointed too at the absence of any rigorous demand for governments to protect and implement their commitments to sexual and reproductive rights, enshrined in the Beijing Declaration. As noted by one critic:
“A review conference, a celebration, is an opportunity to move forward and really get everyone to make commitments to challenge all these heads of states – not all of them are terrific – and to say that until and unless there are national action plans, until and unless there are implementation programs, we’re still going to sit here year after year and it’s not good enough.” .
Whenever the subject of reproductive rights is raised attention is naturally turned towards China, the nation that hosted the 1995 UN World Forum on Women, while across China, occupied Tibet and East Turkestan women were (and still are) denied freedom of choice or control over their own bodies are are forced to submit to the dictates of a male dominated totalitarian state. It is reasonable to consider that this issue,which so closely touches upon a central plank of feminist ideology, would be given prominent exposure? Yet there was a merciless absence of any reference to the subject, nor criticism of China’s program, which causes untold misery and suffering for millions across the Chinese Empire.
Will the suppressed and violated voices of Chinese, Tibetan and Uyghur women be given exposure by Beijing+20? Can we hope to see the assembled NGOs reach a consensus and issue a forceful condemnation of such violations and call upon the Chinese government to honor the commitments it made in the Beijing Declaration and Platform for Action to eliminate coercive practices?
In view of the dismal record of the United Nations on the subject and the presence as guest speaker of Ms Cai Yiping the prospects of any balanced and unbiased assessment of women’s human and reproductive rights in China looks unlikely. Particularly from an individual, who in all probability was responsible for drafting propaganda for an organization that inflicts forced sterilizations upon countless numbers of women!
“By far and away the most important mass organization involved in birth planning is the Women’s Federation (fulian). In the villages, where the great majority of the population still lives, the women in charge of women’s affairs, known as “women’s heads,” have had the duty of enforcing the policy throughout their villages, which means imposing birth restrictions on their neighbors and even relatives. Given the unpopularity of the policy and the drastic measures sometimes ordered from above, enforcing the policy has been an onerous and unpleasant task at best. While grass-roots Women’s Federation cadres have been responsible for the day-to-day work of birth planning, during birth planning campaigns all the major mass organizations including those for workers, youth, and students have been enjoined to contribute to the effort to mobilize the population to achieve population-control targets”
(Source: Greenhalgh, S. & Winkler, E. 2001, Chinese State Birth Planning in the 1990s and Beyond, Resource Information Center, Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), US Department of Justice, Perspective Series, September, pp.77-79 –Attachment 17).
Imagine hosting a conference on women’s rights in the Black townships of Soweto, and having as a prominent speaker, a supporter of the racist policies of the Apartheid Regime of South Africa! Such is the staggering hypocrisy and troubling ethical questions raised by Ms.Cai’s prominence within the Beijing+20 Forum. Perhaps however she is now committed to women’s human rights, that being so we look forward to hearing her condemnation of China’s population policies, which continue to deny and violate women’s reproductive and human rights.
Editor’s Note: Folks this post is by necessity detailed and features various links for cross reference, given the nature of the topic being examined we have no choice but opt for such a disclosure. We hope you will take time to go through this with care and attention which will will appraise you of the extent of censorship and appeasement that infests the United Nations with regard to China’s notorious population control program and its deeply disturbing atrocities.
The United Nation’s Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW) concluded November 7 its fifty-ninth session in which it adopted concluding observations and recommendations on China. It’s central purpose was to establish how China implements the provisions of the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women. A somewhat misplaced exercise, rather like asking a clinically certified pyromaniac how his aversion to flames is progressing! The facts would always be in short supply from a regime notorious for censorship, evasion and deceit, especially when considering that China’s representative was Ms. Song Xiuyan. She is executive member of China’s communist party, Minister and Vice-Chairperson of National Committee on Women and Children under the State Council China, and vice Chairman (sic) of the All China Women’s Federation (ACWF), a national organization that enforces China’s notorious population control policies upon women in China, and occupied Tibet and East Turkestan.
She knows about Tibet having (until January 2010) been a so-called Governor in Amdo, one of occupied Tibet’s three regions (re-named by communist China’s regime as Qinghai Province). During her time there Ms Song displayed a racist intolerance towards Tibetan culture and was deeply resented by Tibetans, particularly given her reportedly close political relationship with China’s former President Hu Jintao. Whose hands are covered in Tibetan blood. According to one well-informed Tibetan source Ms. Song was publicly dismissive of Tibetan culture, an attitude that was reflected in her draconian term of office in the region. It was reported that on occasion she demanded that newly constructed government buildings, including schools, be rebuilt, if they included traditional Tibetan features!
It is not just Ms Song Xiuyan’s barely concealed racism that is troubling, but the organization of which she is joint head, the All China Women’s Federation, whose automaton-like members infest every village, town and city, and are responsible at a local level for the enforcement of the population program. Through a spiral of intimidation and coercion they trample over women’s human and reproductive rights to meet Government population targets, imposing fines, organizing education campaigns, withdrawing employment and housing rights, and if such bullying fails, forcibly sterilizing women. Such harrowing violations are all committed in loyal obedience to China’s communist party ideology. Anyone wishing to learn more about the ACWF’s complicity and implementation of these atrocities is advised to read Susan Greenhalgh’s Chinese State Birth Planning in the 1990s And Beyond
Ms Song Xiuyan who has been warmly received on previous occasions by the UN Commission on the Status of Women and headed China’s delegation at the 59th CEDAW Session and once again managed to largely evade and lie on the subject of forced-sterilizations, an atrocity which the United Nations and Women’s NGOs are virtually silent upon.
Image:archivenet/graphic from @tibettruth
Having carefully examined the documents associated with the latest CEDAW report on China we regret to inform readers that once again those within the UN who claim to be champions of women’s human rights have chosen to marginalize and dilute the issue. So let’s take a look at what was stated, we begin March 10, 2014 when CEDAW published a list of issues it linked directly with China, that would be addressed in its forthcoming reports.See HERE In a section on violence against women there was no mention of China’s forced sterilization program, as we have revealed previously the UN clearly does not regard the issue as constituting a violent act against women. There are just three very slanted references which petition the Chinese authorities for a response, the first features in a section on Stereotypes and harmful practices
“Please indicate how the laws against sex-selective abortion, forced sterilization and female infanticide are monitored and enforced?”
The next appears in a section on health, paragraph 18 includes this curiously selective request of the Chinese authorities:
“Please also provide information on the progress made to combat forced abortions, and reported forced sterilization of transgender women”
The next paragraph asks of China:
“Please explain the measures taken to combat the phenomenon of forced abortions and sterilization of pregnant women who test positive for HIV”
Image:remkotanis/graphic from @tibettruth
These somewhat circumscribed and distorted appeals could not have been more precisely engineered to avoid China facing questions on the staggering scale of forced sterilizations that’s traumatizing countless numbers of women across China and illegally occupied territories such as Tibet, East Turkestan and Southern Mongolia. We can only conclude that the executives within CEDAW and their colleagues in the UN Commission On The Status Of Women are unconcerned with the plight of millions of women across China who are neither positive for HIV or transgender, that face or who suffer being dragged from their homes and being forcibly sterilized, courtesy of the very organization headed by the Chinese Minister so generously applauded by CEDAW in its report’s opening comments!
Note the willingness to accept the existence and practice of supposed laws on countering forced-sterilizations, how naive is CEDAW in swallowing the official propaganda of China’s Regime on the issue. The various cynical assurances offered by China, along with various legislation on the subject offer no genuine protection and meanwhile women continue to be subject to forced sterilizations. Can you imagine say the International Red Cross agreeing to question reports of forced sterilizations in Nazi Germany and then proceeding to ask Heinrich Himmler for a progress report without demanding to know the full extent of such atrocities, how many women were targeted, or evidence of those responsible being prosecuted! In constructing such a singular and specific questions CEDAW has enabled the Chinese Regime to circumvent the major concerns relating to its coercive population control program and the medical atrocities it inflicts. As usual it was aided by an unquestioning mainstream media which chose not to report on the glaring deficiencies and instead placed a positive, if misleading spin that focused on Chinese intimidation of activists See HERE
Against this background we awaited with interest the November 7 publication of CEDAW’s China report and its recommendations, so let’s go see what has been said on the subject
“Stereotypes and harmful practices 24. The Committee recalls its previous concluding observations (CEDAW/C/CHN/CO/6, para. 17) and remains concerned at the persistence of deep-rooted stereotypes regarding the roles and responsibilities of women and men in the family and society, as reflected in the tradition of son-preference, resulting in the adverse sex-ratio by means of illegal sex-selective abortion as well as illegal practices of forced abortion and sterilisation (sic) and infanticide of girls.” (emphasis added) see HERE
Excuse us?! So let’s get this right shall we, the UN’s CEDAW rests responsibility for forced sterilizations, not on a centrally authorized, funded and engineered population control program but as a consequence of societal and stereotype factors? Just in case anyone was unsure if the UN was choosing to paint these harrowing atrocities as nothing but isolated criminal events, unrelated to the policies of the Chinese authorities, it followed up that reference with these comments:
“25. The Committee…… urges the State party to..(b) Intensify the implementation of existing legal measures to address sex-selective abortions, forced abortions, sterilisations (sic) and infanticide of girls” see HERE
Given the continuing censorship and evasion shown towards this major human rights issue, served by the political agendas of member states, we cannot expect any critique and certainly no examination of China’s continuing violation of women’s human rights or its mass campaigns of forced sterilizations suffered by countless women. CEDAW has again failed.
Not since those ghastly 19th Century killers Burke and Hare has Scotland’s premier medical establishment been associated with grisly profits from corpses, not that these days Edinburgh’s Royal College of Surgeons (RCSE) is engaged in any criminal activity, or paying body-snatchers to secure ‘dissection material’. However this august institution is attracting concern as a consequence of one of its Fellows, Doctor Huang Jiefu, a former Chinese health minister, who has been accused of presiding over the removal of organs from executed prisoners without their consent. Report Here
Just what was the RCSE thinking in honoring a man so worryingly linked with such medical atrocities? An individual who has seemingly conceded that “….as recently as November, 2012 that he continues to perform about two liver transplants every week – so that would be 100 organs a year, and using his own figures, 90 to 95 per cent of those would have come from executed prisoners.” Source
We think it is plain wrong that such a respected medical organization, with its ethical principles should choose to honor a man at the heart of a Regime with a notorious record for abusing human rights. If you share our concern then please consider directly contacting the RCSE.
PA to President: Moira Britton and Fiona Ramsay
Tel: (+44) 131 527 1635
Fax: (+44) 131 557 9771
“In the 1990s a very special form of lethal injection, called slow lethal injection, was perfected in China by Chinese officials as a way to preserve the organs so that the person is basically anesthetized, they don’t die right away, it gives the surgeons the time to take out as many organs as they would like to and then the lethal injection is finalized. So, it’s done in a way that actually allows this very, very unsavory mix of execution and medical care and treatment to be done by the same team of doctors. It’s horrific, really.” Source: Maria Fiatarone Singh, Professor of Medicine, Sydney University
In April 2013 Sydney University was coming intense international pressure to strip the honors it bestowed upon Doctor Huang Jiefu, a former Chinese health (sic) minister, following concerns that that he presided over the removal of organs from executed prisoners without their consent. Details here
Activists within Tibettruth were at the forefront of action in exposing this issue and challenging the University to withdraw its award to Doctor Huang, who now oversees the organ transplant committee in China. Apart from some noises that suggested that a review would be made of his honorary professorship, he retained support from some academic colleagues with Sydney University.
Fast forward to November 2014 and it is hard to find across the Internet or other media the published conclusions of such a inquiry, indeed it appears as if the matter has been brushed beneath a very thick carpet. Meanwhile suspicions remain that a man who “….as recently as November, 2012 that he continues to perform about two liver transplants every week – so that would be 100 organs a year, and using his own figures, 90 to 95 per cent of those would have come from executed prisoners.” Source
In the absence of any formal statement, it is probably safe to conclude that Sydney University has not removed its award from Doctor Huang Jiefu and as far as we can determine has not issued any comments condemning China’s medical atrocities.
In light of this, and considering the exposure generated we are puzzled at the decision by Students For Free Tibet (SFT) to use the venue of Sydney University for its November 7 meeting on Tibet, when that institution employs and honors China’s former ‘Minister Of Forced Organ Extractions’! We can only hope that this entirely unwise and misguided choice is relieved by SFT issuing a statement making clear its position on the matter and adding its voice to call for Sydney University to withdraw its honorary professorship to Doctor Huang.
Original photo via tchrd/graphic from @tibettruth
In another political show trial China’s regime has revealed its contempt for genuine justice and charged November 3 a number of Tibetans in Ngaba region of Amdo, eastern Tibet with murder. It would appear that displaying compassion and support to anyone who sacrifices themselves for the freedom of Tibet is regarded as a criminal act! Details of the case have been released by the exiled Tibetan organization Gu Chu Sum and may be read on may be read on Dossier Tibet’s site
What troubling currents are flowing through the Federation for a Democratic China (FDC), an organization dedicated to human rights, democracy and freedom? It seems to be targeted by the corrosive influences of the CCP. Should you consider such as the ramblings of baseless conspiracy have a look at the website of the Forum for a Democratic China and Asia.
It features a curious agenda that seems strangely remote from championing human rights and freedoms that no doubt will attract criticism as being a dilution of the core principles and objectives of the FDC. Indeed one prominent figure within the organization will be boycotting the Forum and issued a public reassurance that the FDC will continue to promote democracy and human rights in China, and continue its call for an end of single party regime.
The wording of the Forum’s agenda is surely a matter of concern to the Federation For A Democratic China, which while not the organizing authority for the meeting, nor author will be deeply unhappy about this event.
‘First, adhere to the principle of peaceful, rational and non-violent, Abandon the idea and means of “violent revolution”.
Second, the non-violent movement need to be brought from human rights, politics to other areas of the national and people’s daily living in social activities, For example: the establishment of an effective anti-corruption system, to curb housing prices, focus on employment, social security system, and the abolition of the urban and rural household registration system.
Third, China’s social democratic movement is a comprehensive renovation project requires attention and participation of the whole society.
In order to mobilize the people to participate in change, In order to reduce the fear for the ruling group, they may be afraid of to be liquidated in the future, in order to reduce the cost of social change
We advocate a rational justice, equality before the political and legal system. In order to resolve the violent atmosphere of the community, to relieve tensions between nations, we need to use a fair and tolerant approach.’
Many tireless activists for China’s freedom and democracy will no doubt be extremely disappointed by such assertions, and while social and economic issues are of importance, these should not be at the cost of excluding individual freedoms. The syntax featured in the Agenda has a worrying similarity to that used by the CCP in its National People’s Congress, cynical euphemisms and distractions that evade any genuine respect of human rights and freedom, while promoting blind loyalty to the Regime!
On what basis does the author, Mr Fei Liangyong, a former President of the FDC, demand that violence be abandoned as a means of revolution? As far as we can determine the Federation For A Democratic China, and indeed the present demonstrations in Hong Kong, have not called for, nor exercised violence. That is the bloody specialism of the Chinese Regime! It appears to be something of a fallacy therefore, especially given that the FDC rejects violence and revolutionary ideas in words and deeds.
Secondly it is the terrorism of China’s authorities which surely demands to be exposed and challenged at the forthcoming Forum, not issuing demands of China’s people who have neither the resources or ability to mobilize any violent revolution!
Thirdly the Agenda of the Forum fails to acknowledge that it is China’s people who are the victims of violence, as observed most recently during the Occupy Hong Kong movement, imposed by a merciless regime. Yet the state-engineered repression and abuse seems strangely absent from the Forum’s agenda, instead demands are made ordinary citizens to end civil resistance!
Lastly, Fei Liangyong has forgotten a simple yet profound reality, fairness & tolerance cannot exist under an atmosphere of tyranny. Such values are dependent upon justice and truth, how absurd it is to expect tolerance and understanding from China’s people when their daily lives are subject to such restriction, censorship and state-violence? Yet his agenda states: “In order to resolve the violent atmosphere of the community, to relieve tensions between nations, we need to use a fair and tolerant approach.”
Surely a forum dedicated towards democratic values should be standing in unquestioned solidarity with the people, not proposing compromises and tolerance towards a regime that seeks to maintain its corrupt and oppressive grip!
There are many questions raised by the agenda of this conference which is due to be held in Munich from Nov 1 to 3, 2014 and anyone committed to human rights and freedom will be concerned at what looks more like a manifesto of appeasement than a declaration of support for a democratic and free China. Meanwhile it is hoped that the exiled Tibetan Administration or related organizations will give serious thought to being associated with this event, as their participation would make a mockery of the resistance being waged by the Tibetans inside Tibet. Who are sacrificing their lives, personal liberty and well-being to oppose the tyranny of China’s regime