Government

Image: yahoonews/augmented by @tibettruth

Across the water in a land where its government is often heard to boast of traditions of democracy and human-rights something is very rotten.

This week a Minister of the UK authorities, Gavin Williamson, was summararilly dismissed from his post by Theresa May, the reason you may wonder? Well, there had been a leak of information to the media from a security star chamber called the National Security Council (NSC). This gathering is attended by Ministers, heads of MI6, GCHQ, MI5 and counter-terrorism police, they are all bound by what’s termed the Official Secrets Act. Which is effectively a state gagging order, violation of which is punishable as a crime.

A rapidly assembled inquiry was launched and within a couple of days the Prime Minister had laid responsibility for the disclosure at the door of Mr Williamson. He had it was claimed breached the security protocols and convention of supreme confidentiality under which the NSC operates. What’s more there was talk of him being open to prosecution. As it stands he continues to vigorously deny such charges and has called for an inquiry into the affair.

Image:wsj

What would be revealed if such an investigation was allowed to delve into events which lead to the release of press reports that Theresa May was considering allowing controversial Chinese communications and tech corporation Huawei a contract in constructing a 5G network within the UK?

Image: mobilenews/augmented @tibettruth

In all probability such an examination is not likely as there may well be too many politically sensitive skeletons rattling around, which could prove damagingly embarrassing to the Prime Minister’s government and her Conservative Party. There’s already an indication that the matter is being slammed down with yesterday’s announcement by the Metropolitan Police that the disclosure did not constitute a criminal offence, Nor it was claimed did the information released breach the Official Secrets Act.

The UK political establishment operates a policy of active appeasement towards the Chinese regime. indicated here as the British equivalent of the White House is decorated to celebrate the Spring New Year

Image:cgtn

“I am satisfied that what was disclosed did not contain information that would breach the Official Secrets Act,” said Neil Basu, head of the Met’s specialist operations. “I have considered all the information available to me and I have taken legal advice. I am satisfied that the disclosure did not amount to a criminal offence either under the Official Secrets Act (OSA) or misconduct in a public office. No crime has been committed and this is not a matter for the police.” (Source: The Guardian 5/4/2019)

John Browne, formerly Lead Non-Executive Director of David Cameron’s Conservative Government, now Chair at Huawei UK

Image: standford.edu

This statement raises an interesting possible legal defense for future whistle-blowers who could argue that it‘s not the action itself which defines if the OSA has been breached but the nature of information. From the government‘s perspective it does something more important, eliminates the risk of exposure within a court, it also returns complete control to them. Who can now bury this controversy deeply away from what could be dangerous further scrutiny. Before exploring further some interesting connections between the UK government, former Ministers and officials with Huawei let‘s change the focus.

Andrew Cahn, formerly headed David Cameron’s Conservative Government on UK Trade & Investment. SInce 2011 a Non-Executive Director of Huawei Technologies UK

Image: dailymail

While the UK government struggles to justify it’s reported approval of allowing Huawei to engineer the 5G network across Britain, or reassure its allies that any potential security risk can be contained the Chinese corporation is a key facilitator in the oppression of the Tibetan people. Not that the political establishment in London extends any substantial concern towards the plight of Tibet, especially when engaged in lucrative commercial partnerships with Chinese corporations!

Yet if they bothered to carefully assess the role of Huawei in occupied Tibet they would soon realize that its insistence on being an independent business, not influenced or constrained by China’s regime is palpable nonsense. Like all major corporations within China Huawei is deeply and actively enmeshed with the political machinery of the Chinese state, without the sanction of the authorities it would not exist. It cannot operate without the approval of Xi Jinping and his regime. We are not though talking of a well intentioned company that happens to be under the control of China’s totalitarian tyranny, Huawei is an engaged player, fully subscribed to the extreme political ideology which aims to expand Chinese political, military and national interests.

John Suffolk, formerly Chief Information Officer for David Cameron’s Conservative Government. Now Senior Vice President and the Global Cyber Security & Privacy Officer for Huawei

Image: desibelajans

This is shown by its suffocating presence in Tibet where it has been constructing a range of communication and security networks, the purpose of which is to monitor Tibetans, intruding into every aspect of their daily living. Establishing an extensive CCTV coverage, creating facial recognition systems and security barriers at Tibetan monasteries and other public locations. Working in collusion with other Chinese communication providers it has engineered a surveillance network which monitors social-media and telephone systems to identity any dissent against China’s regime.

Image:tibetfr

In this regard it is partnering in the repressive assault against Tibetan cultural and national identity, a collaboration which should be of serious concern to governments, including of that of the United Kingdom, which claim to place the highest value upon human rights and freedoms. Yet it‘s interest is directed towards strengthening ties with Huawei, even to the extent of jeopardizing security alliances with the USA and other countries.

The prospect of trade and the significant profits which flow from collaborating with the Chinese technology giant are presented as being in the interest of the nation, enabling economic and performance benefits fron the latest network platform. Such claims, of course, are open to debate and should be measured against handing over control of communications infrastructure to an arm of the Chinese state.

Facial recognition systems are being rolled out across China and occupied lands such as Tibet and East Turkistan.

Image:scmp

While the advantages of 5G are promoted as offering a digital revolution such technology also affords a totalitarian state disturbing levels of increased social control and surveillance. That is already happening within China, facilitated by Huawei, while there are now three 5G base-stations operating inside occupied Tibet. One, at the Lhasa Post and Telecommunications School, the other two are installed at the office of the Tibet Post Group in Lhasa, and in China Mobile’s Tibet branch building.

Image: archivenet

It‘s said that power corrupts, in reality it probably reveals an inherent capacity for venality, is such self-interest at the heart of this controversy? Have prominent figures linked to the UK Government and Conservative Party profited from Huawei? Was it coincidental that fairly senior people associated with former Prime Minister David Cameron’s administration were offered and accepted prominent executive positions onto the board of Huawei UK? Clearly finance has dominated the scene since Huawei promised in 2012 that it would be investing £1.3 billion in the British economy.!

Whatever the facts, which look set to be confined indefinitely to the archives, in defending its partnership with Huawei and risking the integrity of its communications network and national security the UK authorities are collaborating with a corporation which is enabling the violent oppression and 24/7 surveillance of the Tibetan people!

Mr Xiao Wunan Chinese 'unofficial' envoy — Mr Xiao Wunan Chinese ‘unofficial’ envoy

Image: bbc

Does anyone, apart from those in denial, deluded or plain innocent of mind consider governments act with integrity, honesty and a genuine commitment to human rights?

If political systems forged from founding principles of justice, democracy, freedom and accountability to their citizens indulge in deception and manipulating public opinion it is naive on a colossal scale to regard information sourced to from China’s totalitarian regime as being factual, balanced or free from propaganda.

Such a reality of course is not allowed to obstruct the mainstream media’s goal of pumping out tasty morsels of news, no surprise then that the BBC today released a report of a 2012 meeting between the Dalai Lama and Mr Xiao Wunan. See HERE

An Executive Vice Chairman of the Asia Pacific Exchange and Cooperation Foundation we are informed that it was this card-carrying member of China’s communist regime who provided video footage of his meeting with the Tibetan leader. What a portrait of understanding, cooperation it presents, raising an illusory hope of progress in the notoriously failed efforts of an agreement on Tibet between China’s regime and the exiled Tibetan Administration.

Was the outreach by Mr Xiao indicative of a softening of attitude by the Chinese Regime towards the issue of Tibet, his unofficial meetings with prominent Tibetan leaders to be seen as a positive gesture, or was his presence reflecting a darker agenda?

“An Indian researcher Jayadeva Ranade (a former senior government official) in an article ‘A concerned dragon: China’s fresh overture to Tibetans’ wrote that Xiao Wunan probably carried a personal message from a senior Chinese leader, possibly Xi Jinping. Ranade wrote that he could have informed the Dalai Lama that he was welcome to spend his last days in Beijing provided he gave up ‘anti-China’ activities and expressed support for the Communist regime. The article also notes coincidentally, within a month of the meeting the designation of the Head of the Central Tibetan Administration (CTA) was changed from ‘Kalon Tripa’ (Prime Minister) to the less controversial, from Beijing’s perspective, ‘Sikyong’ (political leader) Source: extract from2012 article by Jamyang Norbu ‘FREE RADIO FREE ASIA’!

Image: archivenet

One thing for sure his contacts with the Dalai Lama and Karmapa would not have happened without the consent or knowledge of China’s government, the same authority which consistently rejects any overture of compromise offered by the Dalai Lama and the exiled Tibetan Administration.

At the same time Beijing has long meddled within exiled Tibetan politics and its cancerous tentacles have extended into the heart of an Tibetan Administration that has abandoned the cause of its own people in pursuit of an autonomy under Chinese rule. Which brings us back to the objectives of Xia Wunan’s trip to Dharamsala, and despite the BBC description of him as a former official, his role would have been far from informal. As suggested by the Indian researcher above, he would be able to exert further demands from the Chinese authorities. That he made available a video of his meeting too would suggest a propaganda objective, a moderate and flexible China, earnest in its efforts to reach an understanding! Whatever the motivations and directives which are concealed by the charm and smiles of Mr Xiao Wunan there can be no doubt that China’s Regime is relentless in its persecution and suppression of the Tibetan people. Until such time as China enjoys true political and civil freedom then the warm assurances of its envoys must be assessed with extreme scrutiny. Something which the BBC report failed to exercise in any great measure.