SPECIAL ISSUE: Tibet at the UNCHR's 52nd Session in Geneva (18 March - 26 April, 1996)

"Li [Peng] is also unhappy with a recent European Union decision to support resolution criticizing China at a forthcoming UN human rights session, the paper [South China Morning Post] said."

[International Herald Tribune report, "Chinese Leader Radically Cuts Trip to Europe; Protests Feared", 6-7 April, 1996. Li Peng cancelled stops in Luxembourg and Netherlands and shorten his French visit from 7 to 3 days.]

As known, Human Rights Watch-Asia (on 26 March) and Amnesty International (on 27 March) released two very revealing press statements about the EU "deal" with China to "withdraw" the resolution. Amnesty called this move as EU being "gagged" by China to act on its human rights record. On 28 March, the Tibetan UN Initiative urged all 15 EU members "not to be under the impression that China's promise or commitment to improve the human rights situation in Tibet and China, through an understanding reached outside the mechanism of the Commission on Human Rights is the ultimate way. We believe the passage of a United Nations resolution is the only way as China enters into its transitional period," the letter said.

As for the situation of China resolution now, on Friday (29 March) the European Union, finally, decided during an EU summit in Turin (Italy) that they would join with the United States to "push" a resolution at this year's Commission. After this announcement, information emerged that the European Union was taking a "defeatist" attitude while conducting its lobby-work on the China resolution. Tibet Bureau again forwarded our concerns to EU Foreign Ministers on 3 April. The letter said: "A number of European delegates are saying openly that the general feeling among EU States is that the resolution will not pass. Regardless of the accuracy of such an assessment, this kind of defeatist attitude, together with the reports, which are being openly discussed at the Commission, that the EU is not fully committed, will result in the loss of a number of votes which could perhaps otherwise be won. Thus, this attitude is, as it were, a self-fulfilling prophecy...Now that China has not responded constructively to this op

ening provided by the EU, it is all the more important to show Europe's determination and the consistency in its position. The Union's credibility is at stake vis a vis China in this respect."

The Tibetan Delegation in Geneva is yet to receive a confirmed text of the resolution, however, reports from diplomatic sources say that the Tibet language remains the same as last year. That language in the preambular paragraph expresses the concern at the "inadequate protection of the distinct cultural, ethnic, linguistic and religious identity of Tibetans." The efforts of the Tibetan UN Initiative for the inclusion of a paragraph on Panchen Lama was reportedly rejected after extensive debates within the European Union, sources said. Reportedly, major powers like United Kingdom, Germany, France and the United States did not support the mention of Panchen Lama, Wei Jingsheng and Orphanage in the resolution.

The Tibetan Delegation at the 52nd Commission: Kalon Tashi Wangdi, Kasur Lodi G. Gyari, Rep. Kesang Y. Takla, Sec. Tempa Tsering, Rep. Ngawang Rabgyal, Rep. Chungdak Koren, Dr. Michael van Walt, Mrs. Tsering Norzom, Mr. Gendun Rinchen, Mrs. Delek Gonnot and Ngawang C. Drakmargyapon.

"There's one golden rule-aside from harmless nagging from western states on China's human rights record-stay away from strong security council members. Chechnya still hasn't found a place on the commission's agenda."

[Geneva Post, "Security Council Rights", 3-10 April, 1996]