Image:broadsheetie

As Ireland finds itself enslaved by the draconian economic demands of the European Union and International Monetary Fund, the socially crippling cost of addressing a national debt (created in part by the very banks who now will profit from measures forced upon the good people of Eire) sees  Enda Kenny’s (Prime Minister Above) Government scrambling in the dirt looking  for the fabled shoots of recovery. To encourage such growth treasury officials in Dublin are anxious to secure foreign investment, and who else would they turn to but China. With 175 million Euros targeted at the creation of a China trade center in Athlone, no doubt to the delight of the Ireland-China Association, the impending visit by China’s Vice President attracts a particular significance for Ireland’s political establishment. We can be sure that every effort will be made to accommodate Mr. Xi Jinping and his entourage, far beyond the usual generosity accorded to visiting political leaders. Of course the proponents of ‘what’s good for business, is good for Ireland’ will be fully present at the edge of the aptly red carpet, who knows perhaps some have been practising some Mandarin greetings, now there’s a sound to charm the ears, the Kerry brogue grappling with the tonal nuances of Chinese! .

Beneath, however, the painted smiles, diplomatic posturing and warm words of praise expected to greet China’s Vice President is an economic real-politic and the uneasy sight of Ireland’s bankers, politicians and business kowtowing to the representative of a nation with the blood of countless numbers on its hands will, we may anticipate, be evaded, justified or ignored by  the jaded argument, that constructive engagement with China will lead to improvements in terms of human rights and basic freedoms.  This phony mantra, a favorite of those who care more for profits than rights,  has been repeated for years by the United States and proved a singular failure, of course its proponents are acutely aware that it was never going to bring positive change nor lessen the suffering of millions who endure China’s tyranny. It is a cynical justification, a corrosive denial that enables any element of conscience to be dropped into a very deep well.

Instead of putting on its Sunday best and offering another biscuit to that nice man from China maybe Rialtas na hÉireann (Ireland’s Government) would benefit from investing a similar interest and commitment towards the catalogue of atrocities that enables China’s regime to maintain power. If that fails to awaken the suits from Dublin they could always examine the harrowing issue of China’s coercive population control program, in which women are dragged from their homes, tied onto a medical slab and forcibly sterilized   Then of course there is occupied Tibet, a land whose people have been viciously denied their national freedom, human rights since China invaded in 1950, as shown by recent reports resistance to China’s tyranny continues, including the self-immolation of 23 Tibetans, who sacrificed themselves for Tibetan independence and in support of the Dalai Lama. A brutal crackdown by Chinese paramilitary forces is now under-way, huge areas are under siege, these are days of mass arrests, trucks disappearing into the cold night, torture and oppression the psychopathic response to any dissenting voice

Ireland’s Government is acutely aware of the cultural genocide waged against the Tibetan and Uyghur people, cognisant too of the forced-labor camps where colossal numbers of people endure abuse and conditions not seen since Stalinist Russia. They are conscious equally of China’s  disturbing record on executions, the torture cells and persecution of Falon Gong practitioners Yet knowledge without action can be a pernicious form of denial, particularly when fuelled by economic interest, it also a tacit endorsement of such violations, however these inconvenient facts are dismissed by the champions of commercial engagement with China. They may as well be Holocaust deniers!

It does not of course have to be this way, there exists still among Ireland’s people, a profound sense of justice and empathy towards those suffering the odious realities of colonization and oppression, a reflection of Ireland’s experiences under British rule. We need only consider the tireless actions of Mary Robinson and Mairead Maguire, or the prominent support extended to Palestine, to realize that the values of justice, human rights and national freedom are cherished by Eire’s people.  That profound sense of acknowledging a truth and representing a fundamental goodness once found poignant expression in the words of Mr. Frank Aiken, Ireland’s UN Ambassador, who during the 1959 UN General Assembly debate on Tibet noted:

“Looking around this assembly, … I think how many benches would be empty in this hall if it had always been agreed that when a small nation or a small people fall in the grip of a major power no one could ever raise their voice here; that once there was a subject nation, then must always remain a subject nation. Tibet has fallen into the hands of the Chinese People’s Republic for the last few years. For thousands of years, … it was as free and as fully in control of its own affairs as any nation in this Assembly, and a thousand times more free to look after its own affairs than many of the nations here.”

Many will be both surprised and disappointed that of all nations, Ireland, once under foreign occupation, colonized, exploited and its culture suppressed, finds itself with a political and business elite who, entranced by the spell of China’s economic allure, have abandoned the very principles from which Ireland as nation was forged. As the band of Óglagh nahÉireann (Ireland’s Defense Force) strikes into the troubling strains of China’s national anthem to greet Xi Jinping, no one possessed of integrity and normal intelligence, will be convinced by, nor comfortable with, the ethics of arguing that Prime Minister Enda Kenny’s slogan ‘Let’s Get Ireland Working’ be supported by collaborating with a totalitarian state, nor take precedence over the human rights and freedom of all those tortured and oppressed by China.

Thanks to our friends at @tibettruth for this graphic and the important questions it raises on mainstream reportage on occupied Tibet.

Image:tibetcoins

Prior to China invading in 1950, Tibet’s independence was a common currency held in the hands of Tibetans, as shown by this coin called Karchung, with Tibet’s Snow Lion symbol and Tibetan letters that carry the motto: dga’-ldan-pho-bran-phyod-las-rnam-rgyal. ‘The Ga-den Palace, victorious in all directions’

Image:archivenet

Have you noticed the troubling way in which mainstream reportage on Tibet seems to resemble China’s propaganda on that subject? Can we expect anything else, given the degree of totalitarian control exerted upon foreign media operating in China? This parlous state-of-affairs may well be explained equally by the increasingly cosy relations between media organizations and China’s regime, a result of the economic and political allure that has the power to blind critical and ethical faculties. Media executives from CNN, Associated Press, Reuters, Al-Jazeera and the BBC are regularly invited to Beijing to enjoy the pleasures of plate and bottle by their charming hosts at Xinhua, China’s Ministry of Disinformation. There’s dark politics at play, fired by not inconsiderable commercial influences, which clearly benefits both China’s authoritarian elite and the press barons. There are other forces too which can explain the constant stream of media misrepresentation on Tibet, that is so accomodating towards China’s version of events in that tragic land. These can range from Editorial policy, drawn from a sympathy towards China, either its culture or political ideology, or a journalistic conformity and laziness by correspondents who follow the line. There is of course a very unjust and ethically worrying outcome to such factors, in that people are mislead on the harrowing reality within occupied Tibet and the facts are being obscured, distorted or ignored. By way of illustration let’s examine today’s article from the British newspaper, The Guardian based on an Associated Press report.

The headline to this piece ‘Two Tibetans Killed By Security Forces’ is an interesting choice following a recent critical exposé of the Guardian’s coverage on Tibet from @AnonymousTibet, who rightly asked why it is that this newspaper is willing to describe Syrian forces as killing and shelling protesters, yet does not apply similarly forceful descriptions when reporting China’s atrocities in Tibet. A valid question indeed and here the paper seems to have got the message. Or has it? Any hopes that this would lead onto to a more factual and independent report soon dissolve, as our eyes fall upon the usual litany of China’s propaganda.

Image:archivenet

So for the purposes of challenging such errant disinformation let’s break down the article in question and add some Editorial responses of our own. For ease of identification we have colored red the offending areas of  reportage and offer our response in blue.

Article Begins:

“Two Tibetan brothers who have been on the run since taking part in anti-government protests (Editorial: these demonstrations are not some disaffected reaction to China’s government, but a clear rejection of Chinese rule and a demand for Tibet’s independence and support for the Dalai Lama) two weeks ago have been shot dead in south-west China’s Sichuan province, (Editorial: actually what was a killing took place in Amdo Region of occupied Tibet) a US-funded broadcaster has reported.

Radio Free Asia said the men were shot and killed after being surrounded in Luhuo county on Thursday. The county was the site of anti-government protests (Editorial: These demonstrations demand Tibet’s independence from China, and are not a local grudge against the Chinese authorities) on 23 January. Radio Free Asia identified the two as Yeshe Rigsal, a 40-year-old monk, and his 38-year-old brother, Yeshe Samdrub, citing sources in the area and in the Tibetan exile community in India.

There has been a recent upsurge in violence in Tibetan areas. (Editorial: Whose ‘violence’? Notice how that term is left hanging there, leaving the suggestion that Tibetans are perpetrating such actions, when the truth is that China’s paramilitary have been shooting, torturing and arresting Tibetans.) The Chinese government blames criminals encouraged by outside forces, but activist Tibetan groups say repressive policies by China are the cause. (Editorial: The ’cause’ of what precisely, the so-called ‘violence’ that the Guardian chooses to report but not ascribe to those actually responsible: China’s military thugs!)

Luhuo and other Tibetan areas of Sichuan (Editorial: Tibetans do not live in (yet) reservations or zoos within China and its Provinces. The areas in question are in reality parts of occupied Tibet, in particular Amdo and Kham regions)   have been cut off because of the violence (Editorial: Wrong! These have been placed under siege and sealed off to enable China’s paramilitary to enforce, without scrutiny, a brutal crackfown, not due to any so-called violence, again slyly implied as being caused by Tibetans) and it was impossible to independently confirm the Radio Free Asia report. Telephone calls to the Communist party propaganda department and the public security office in Luhuo rang unanswered, as did a call to the party propaganda department in Ganzi prefecture, which oversees the county.

Radio Free Asia also reported that another Tibetan had set himself on fire, the latest in a series of self-immolations that Tibetan activists groups say have been carried out to protest against government policies and to call for the return of the Dalai Lama (Editorial: This is factually flawed assertion, as the testimony and witnessed reports of such incidents has shown these acts are demanding Tibet’s freedom and independence along with support for the Dalai Lama)  The Tibetans’ spiritual leader fled to India amid an abortive uprising against Chinese rule in 1959.

The radio station said the unidentified monk set himself on fire in the Yushu area of neighbouring Qinghai province, (Editorial: The region is the occupied Tibetan region of Amdo, with some part of Kham) which was the scene of protests on Wednesday. It was not known whether he survived. If confirmed, the incident would bring to at least 18 the number of monks, nuns and lay Tibetans who have set themselves on fire over the last year, mostly in traditionally Tibetan areas of Sichuan province.(Editorial: As if this propaganda term had not been used enough the correspondent repeats the deception, truth is that there are no ‘Tibetan areas’ what exists is an illegally and violently occupied Tibet) ” Ends.

Image:archivenet

To anyone lacking an informed understanding of Tibet, its history and nature, or objectives, of Tibetan political protest, such articles have a corrosive ability to misinform, implanting China’s cynical distortions and propaganda, while callously misrepresenting the truth. Clearly foreign correspondents in China are upon a very tight leash indeed and unable to move without the knowledge and permission of China’s Ministry of Information. They have become reliant upon official Chinese sources, as reflected daily in the news content of reports on Tibet. As the brave Tibetan people face China’s jack-booted storm-troopers to demand their national freedom, in the comfortable newsrooms of Radio Free Asia, the Guardian and Associated Press (and mainstream media in general) the facts of their history, territorial status, struggle and aspirations, are being censored and twisted, by a journalism that has abandoned factuality, independence and critique in favor of appeasing China’s regime.

Image: Via TYF

Double Click For Larger View

“At 6.30 pm on February 8th at the no.2 primary school in Ngaba county town, a Tibetan set himself on fire while shouting slogans in protest against the Chinese government. The source reporting the event said that the protestor seemed to be a monk, but his name and place of origin and other details were not known. He was taken away immediately by soldiers and police, and his present condition and whereabouts are not known. Two monks were also arrested from the vicinity, but their identities are also unknown.”

Grateful appreciation to VOT

Image:tibetsociety

As report follows report documenting the inspiring bravery of Tibetans, who protest for their nation’s independence despite China’s violent assaults and repressive military crackdown, on the streets of London today a rally has been organized to show solidarity with Tibetans in that sorely oppressed nation. Unlike demonstrations in Tibet this event looks set to resemble more a religious service than a political expression of support for Tibet’s true cause. According to the organizers:

“Tibetan monks will lead prayers and there will be guest speakers including Thubten Samdup, Representative of the Dalai Lama in the UK and Northern Europe. Attendees will wear black ribbons over their mouths to highlight how Tibetans are being silenced in Tibet.” (emphasis added)

This now clichéd form of protest goes back to the Tibetan Women’s Association’s presence at the 1995 UN Conference on Women, and probably beyond too, but it’s not simply the lack of originality that is the concern here but the misleading nature of such a message and the assertion that supports it. As surely the folks arranging this event know, Tibetans are far from silenced by China’s violent occupation, the armoured-thug carriers, electric batons, attack-dogs and machine guns targeted at Tibet’s people has proved a singular failure. Demonstrations, lone protests, pamphlets, 20 self-immolations, the rising of Tibet’s national flag, and mass demonstrations across Eastern Tibet have all demanded Tibet’s rightful independence. This reality is not at represented by the theme adopted for the London rally, nor in the troubling wording of the press release issued by the organizers. Take for example the manner chosen to report the reason for the series of self-immolations in Tibet:

“In the past year, 19 Tibetans have set themselves alight attempting to draw attention to the situation in Tibet,..” (Emphasis added)

This grossly misreports what those Tibetan self-immolators sacrificed their lives for, and misrepresents their motive and political demands in taking such action. As shown by personal testimony and witnessed accounts, these acts were not born of desperation, nor seeking world attention or intervention, .they were asserting Tibet’s rights to and hopes for an independent nation and support for the Dalai Lama.

Does the organizing committee, which includes representatives of the British Tibetan Community, really consider that across the wild lands of Eastern Tibet,  in hushed tones Tibetans gather in nomadic tents or farms to engineer the most effective way to attract world ‘attention’? Do they subscribe to the nonsense that those 20 Tibetans who self-immolated spent time evaluating how to invite international scrutiny of China’s tyranny in Tibet? These heroes of Tibet, in their sacrifice and the political demands of their action, made it perfectly clear what their reasons were, yet the Tibet Society and other members of the committee for this rally appear unwilling to acknowledge that fact.

Given this event is part of a global initiative, called for by Lobsang Sangay, Tibet’s Exiled Prime Minister, and mindful of how his Administration has deserted his people’s struggle for national freedom, it is not entirely surprising that there is such misrepresentation, along with an orchestration to de-politicize demonstrations that otherwise could jeopardize efforts to further appease China’s regime; in the insane pursuit of a ‘solution’ that would surrender entirely Tibetan nationhood.

As these folks stand on the cold side-walks of London in essence endorsing that betrayal, they should ask themselves, why are we not asserting, and expressing solidarity for. the same demands and aspirations as Tibetans in occupied Tibet?

Just what is going down with Twitter? Do their executives have an increasing interest in securing an operation in China? Are the founding principles of freedom of speech and democratic values still held in esteem by Twitter’s management? Such questions have been circulating among our colleagues at @tibettruth, who inform us that for over a week now threads related to ‘Tibet’ and ‘free Tibet’on Twitter have come under attack by political spammers from China. It seems this assault involves a number of automated accounts which are generating spam tweets almost every minute on a 24/7 basis, resulting in a mass occupation in what seems an effort to silence and nullify any critical voices or those championing Tibet’s true cause.

This development is of course no accident.The timing in particular is of interest, coinciding with international outrage at China’s killing of Tibetan protesters, which was being discussed widely on Twitter, which was also serving as a vital conduit for information on China’s vicious attacks upon unarmed Tibetan protesters. The decision by China’s Ministry of Propaganda to effectively censor and undermine such information on Twitter may also be in response to the tremendous work carried out by Tibet activist and supporters, such as those of @tibettruth, who have been hugely active in ensuring the truth is being reported on Tibet and its struggle for independence.

What’s less clear however is the apparent reultance of Twitter to take any action against this obvious attack by China, which is clearly a violation of Twitter’s own rules regarding spamming.We understand that several emails and direct appeals have been made to the Executives at Twitter, along with clear evidence of what’s going on, and account names of those generating such political spam. Yet for whatever reason Dick Costolo,  Chief Exec of Twitter, and his colleagues at Support, have not even had the decency to reply, this curious silence is not helping to address the questions which are now being asked about Twitter and its position with respect to China.

Like a stage conjurer  this respected Columbia University lecturer is indulging in a sleight-of-hand, by deflecting attention away from the factual core of Tibet,  through what an unkind interpretation may see as sophistry and pseudo- intellectual jargon. Assessing the replies on offer in this interview  a reader could be forgiven for imagining,  that far from talking about a people and culture, facing the most horrendous oppression under China’s tyranny, the subject was some anthropological exhibit. Indeed there is an unnerving reptilian detachment to the observations presented which on first appearance, though invested of a certain academic allure, give way to the troubling realization, that what is presented is an essay on illusion and extenuating terminology. A willingness to accommodate China’s perspective on Tibet, and its occupation of that nation, beyond the Golden Mean of academic impartiality, or noble aspirations of critical thinking.

The interview  begins with the roll of a decidedly loaded dice on the notion of stereotypes relating to the issue of Tibet, the remarks which follow offer  a number of examples, all of which seemingly are implied as inherently false, in terms of understanding the ‘real Tibet’. Yet examine the comments more closely and it would not be misplaced to wonder if such views are more about establishing the mirage that there exists some refined clear truth, unsullied by perception. This quintessence on Tibet is, it would seem, only possible through the medium of Tibetan intellectuals, a curious proposal and hardly free from the bias that is being criticized, given that such people are often the very ones who have been thoroughly indoctrinated in terms of China’s thinking on Tibet. This is hinted at by the claim that

 “These images tend to evaporate if you read serious writing produced by Tibetans within Tibet, or if you are able to talk in depth with people from there.”. (Emphasis Added)

Well many people,  do converse with Tibetans of all social and educational backgrounds from that sorely oppressed country and a remarkably consistent picture emerges. One  reflected by a wealth of documentation, witnessed testimony and media reportage, that a common aspiration and political objective, that characterizes protests across Tibet, is a demand for Tibetan independence. A reality no doubt that would be dismissed by the interviewee as yet another stereotypical distortion, along with the cold fact of the nature and extent of suffering China’s occupation of Tibet has inflicted. Which the interview happily circumscribes as:

“..the political perception of Tibetans as victims who have suffered great abuses heroically and non-violently..”

No doubt the Tibetan political prisoners of Drapchi Prison outside Lhasa will be greatly encouraged by such words, as they endure another torture session for failing to grasp the essentials of Patriotic Education! Not content with the sly suggestion that the harrowing experiences of Tibetans under China’s tyranny may be nothing more than a biased viewpoint. the interview goes on to misrepresent, through a partial and selective analysis, the objectives and causal factors of protest in Tibet. This is achieved by a careful emphasis upon China’s highly repressive policies on religion in Tibet and its increasingly shrill denouncements of the Dalai Lama for purposes of propaganda.

Now there’s no dispute that the interference, restrictions and intimidation enforced upon Tibetan monasteries by China’s regime has generated understandable resentment for Tibetans religious and practice. However, what has been carefully avoided in that selective examination is the reality that demonstrations and uprisings in Tibet from the late 1980s onwards, including recent self-immolations and protests in Eastern Tibet during the past few weeks, have shared a very common aspiration and demand, namely Tibet’s independence. The shelves of a library could be easily filled with innumerable highly detailed reports which document that while Tibetans of course hold the most profound devotion towards the Dalai Lama, and are indeed incensed by the brutal erosion of religious freedoms, it is the independence of Tibet which lies at the heart of opposition to China’s occupation. 

On the subject of a ‘Free Tibet’ again a message of ‘realism’ is offered, although there’s something not quite convincing, despite the superficial reasoning on display

“The more desperate the situation becomes, the more many Tibetans see the key issue as policies that erode their culture and identity, and for those, the idea of freedom probably is reduced to simply any kind of relaxation by the current regime – anything that diminishes the dominating role of Chinese in their everyday lives”. (Emphasis Added)

This breathtaking and baseless assertion, that presumes to represent the inner hopes and demands of Tibetans, degrades Tibetans and their ongoing conviction to the cause for an independent Tibet, which stereotypes notwithstanding, is clearly evident by ongoing protests in the face of China’s vicious oppression. Such words, though seemingly measured and nuanced, in truth peddle a thoroughly distorted impression, infused with despair and a defeatism. They may as well scream ‘surrender now’.

For the commentator the subject of Tibetan independence is kicked slyly into the realm of dream and the safest of zones, the past, while making sure to reinforce the fallacious impression upon the reader that some Rubicon moment has fallen upon the political consciousness of Tibetan thinking.

“So for many of Tibetans the dream of independence and the memory of past independence is certainly strong, but may now take second place to more pragmatic aspirations. We can’t be sure of this, and it could change at any time, but it looks like a lot of Tibetans, perhaps most of them, would accept a compromise solution if the Dalai Lama could get one from China. Some would still like independence – it seems is that a rapidly increasing number view Tibet as having been independent in the past – but in the minds of many people almost anything is better than the policies in Tibet now.” (Emphasis Added)

Such artful misrepresentation has often characterized the views of Robert Barnett on Tibet, some would argue he is merely being the nuanced and objective academic, others may counter that he displays a bias towards China. What is clear is that there exists in his writings on the subject, a strange and worrying alchemy, in which just enough is offered to suggest the appearance of balance and impartiality. Yet never sufficient to dissolve the impression that  he is operating according to a preconceived ideology which is not only intolerant of the concept of Tibetan independence, but conforms to a mindset which would consign the people of Tibet to a merciless destiny under Communist China.

Such commentators strive to present themselves a some form of ‘honest broker’ in which they can air their views as a moderate assessment between alternative perspectives, yet that is illusory, albeit subscribed to by many within intellectual circles who have long offered libation to the shibboleth that an academic is by definition detached, neutral and devoid of emotional bias towards a particular aspect of a subject. That may well have credibility in terms of hard science, but when talking about Tibet there is in fact no middle ground, or equally valid contesting positions. Given the historical facts of Tibet’s independence, the recorded and bloody truth of its military annexation by China, and the decades of cultural genocide waged against Tibetans anyone claiming academic ‘objectivity’ are reliant upon using  a false dichotomy.  This  is what is essentially presented in the interview, which apart from investing a veneer of supposed impartiality, also enables such commentators to avoid confronting, in any profound sense, the appalling injustice of Tibet’s occupation and the resultant violations arising from this. But also means they can make a very convenient detour around the thorny issue of independence.  This is a significant identifier and reveals a lack of commitment and conviction, an unwillingness to make a stand on the side of Tibet, and its legitimate struggle for independence.  In its place we have essentially a manifesto of appeasement, which in insisting upon a ‘realistic’ accommodation of  Chinese rule, legitimises Communist China’s invasion and resultant colonization of Tibet, a previously independent nation.

Image:womenofchina1

This is Ms. Meng Xiaosi, member of China’s communist party, Minister and Vice-Chairperson of National Committee on Women and Children under the State Council China, and vice president 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. In March 2010 she received the applause of the United Nations Commission on the Status of Women and Women’s NGOs attending the CSW Meeting in New York.

Ms Xiaosi no doubt congratulated her psychopathic colleagues, when in a period of two weeks nearly 10, 000 women were sterilized in one city alone http://www.amnesty.org.uk/news_details.asp?NewsID=18720 Of which Amnesty International noted at that time:

“Local officials aim to sterilise 9, 559 people by 26 April, some against their will, in a drive to meet family planning targets in Puning City, Guangdong Province, southern China…The local authorities claim that by the end of 11 April, the 20-day campaign had already met 50 per cent of its target. A local doctor, quoted in the Chinese media, said that his team was working from 8am until 4am the next day performing surgeries for sterilisation. Local reports suggest at least some people are not freely consenting to being sterilised“

The ideological stormtroopers of Ms Meng Xiaosi’s All China Women’s Federation 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 Goverment population targets, imposing fines, organizing education campaigns, withdrawing employment and housing rights, and if such bullying fails, forcibly sterilizing women.

As a leading communist Chinese Minister, with responsibility for women, and particularly her role in the All China Women’s Federation, Meng Xiaosi has played a prominent role in planning and authorising China’s population control tyranny, which has attracted international attention and condemnation from human rights organizations such as Amnesty International.

“Forced sterilisation amounts to torture, and it is appalling that the authorities are subjecting people to such an invasive procedure against their will. Reports that relatives are imprisoned as a means of pressurising couples into submitting to surgery are incredibly concerning. The Puning City authorities must condemn this practice immediately and ensure that others are not forcibly sterilised.” (Kate Allen Director of Amnesty International UK)

Regarding China’s forced sterilizations the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) and its associated NGOS have proved disappointingly apathetic to the plight of their sisters who are being subject to the horrors of such atrocities. This major violation of women’s human and reproductive rights is consistently ignored and avoided by the CSW and many women’s NGOs, who assemble annually to debate and promote rights for women, apart that is from the right not to be forcibly sterilized!