Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: End Arms Embargo Against China?
America's Debate > Archive > Assorted Issues Archive > [A] International Debate
Google
turnea
QUOTE
German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder has called for lifting the EU’s arms embargo against China. The embargo is the last one that was imposed after the bloody suppression of student revolts at Tiananmen Square in 1989.

“The new China is no longer the Tiananmen-China,” dpa quoted a delegation member travelling with Schröder on a three-day trip to China. While the People’s Republic apparently has not asked for arms deliveries, Chinese leaders consider the embargo “discrimination,” German government representatives told the news service.

They added that China had proven itself as a responsible partner in the United Nations as well as by acting as a mediator in the North Korea nuclear crisis. France has already suggested lifting the embargo.


Is Schröder right to call for the lifting of the ban?

Has China made acceptable progress in the area of human rights?

Edited to add:

Ack! Could the spelling error in the title be fixed? blush.gif dazed.gif

Thanks!
Google
GoAmerica
I do not think this was a wise move. China is still a major human rights violator.

Also, it's latest threats towards Taiwan is a concern and Taiwan is not as militarily superior as China but they do get military technology from us.
DreamPipEr
Hi this is my first post here.

No I do not believe Schroeder is right. I think his motives for wanting to lift the ban as well his support of China's position on Taiwan independence all comes down to Germany's trading interest with China. As reported by Deutsche Welle, China has replaced Japan as it's most important trading partner in Asia.

Progress in Human Rights??? No way, unless, of course one believes that the death penalty for breaking Sars quarantine orders is an appropriate punishment.
GoAmerica
QUOTE(dreampiper @ Dec 5 2003, 12:32 AM)
Progress in Human Rights???  No way, unless, of course one believes that the death penalty for breaking Sars quarantine orders is an appropriate punishment.

Welcome dreampiper. I hope we have more chances to debate thumbsup.gif

You make a good point on China's "SARS execution" stuff. Also, the overall Human Rights situation of China is still terrible. And how about this interesting tidbit of news from HRW.org: Article
Julian
Yes, I also think that Schroeder's is wrong to call for an end to the EU arms embargo against China. Indeed, I think that there is a case to be made for extending arms embargos to other countries not currently covered. The whole of the Middle East, for example.
TragicClown
Keep in mind that the EU and all of its goverments view the American death penality as barbaric and a violation as fundemental human rights.
GoAmerica
QUOTE(TragicClown @ Dec 12 2003, 01:31 AM)
Keep in mind that the EU and all of its goverments view the American death penality as barbaric and a violation as fundemental human rights.

Ok...so what does this have to do with this topic?
Ultimatejoe
It's pretty clear he was demonstrating that human rights are a subjective concept; one which is very dangerous to apply to considerations of arms sales.
nikachu
On the other hand, morality, good and evil etc is ALL subjective.

So if you're going to have moral reasons for banning arm sales, then why not be subjective?

Most stuff is subjective in the long run.

Perhaps a better (although more amoral) policy would be not to sell arms to countries that look like they will attack other countries.

Or only to allies or only to democracies.

But getting back to the topic. If China is going to be the economic giant everyone says it will, then it will probably want to develop its own arms industry - and a sophisticated one at that. I cannot see China being content with the current US military dominance...so it probably won't matter if France or Germany sell them arms in the long run.

Britain is still the major arms producer of Europe and the UK govt would be unlikely to do anything that upsets the US, especially as the main purchaser of UK arms is the US govt....so unless its okay with the US, the UK won't be selling them arms...
turnea
QUOTE(nikachu @ Dec 12 2003, 11:30 AM)
On the other hand, morality, good and evil etc is ALL subjective...

But getting back to the topic. If China is going to be the economic giant everyone says it will, then it will probably want to develop its own arms industry - and a sophisticated one at that. I cannot see China being content with the current US military dominance...so it probably won't matter if France or Germany sell them arms in the long run.

Britain is still the major arms producer of Europe and the UK govt would be unlikely to do anything that upsets the US, especially as the main purchaser of UK arms is the US govt....so unless its okay with the US, the UK won't be selling them arms...

Although it is convenient to use subjectivity as a cure for having to make any moral judgments, if it weren't for the fact that we all should eventually take a stand on such issues, we certainly wouldn't be at a site like this. wink2.gif

That out of the way, even if China does eventually set up its own arms industry to its satisfaction that does not excuse Germany and France for trying to drop the embargo. The UK may be the major arms producers, but I seriously doubt Schröder and Chirac would be caling for this if there was nothing in it for them. shifty.gif

In answer to my questions, from all the information I recieve, the Chinese continue to live under an oppressive government. The Chinese government should not be enabled is it misguided policies (both domestic and foreign) with French and German arms.
Google
Paladin
QUOTE
Is Schröder right to call for the lifting of the ban?


No, I believe an arms embargo should stay in place. China is an authoritarian nation that has annexed a sovereign nation(Tibet), continues to oppress it's people, and sees the forced annexation of a democracy(Taiwan) as a major foreign policy goal. The West has a duty to help preserve Taiwanese democracy IMO, unless the Taiwanese themselves vote for unification.
DesertFox
Why does China's HUMAN Rights policies have to do with anything. If you want to complain about human rights, look at Saudi Arabia or Iran. China is a world power, and it should not be left out of anything major in the world and especially trade, no matter the conditions and its policies.

Also talking about Taiwan and Tibet.

Taiwan and Tibet were both parts of MAINLAND CHINA. Tibet was always unofficially a sovereign of the Imperial Chinese due to their Buddhist ties. Taiwan was an island taken over by the Tang Dynasty. WHen the Chinese Civil War was about to end, CHang Kai Shek, the loser of the conflict decided to evacuate the mainland to Taiwan. The Communist Chinese never ended the conflict during the time period by a maritime assault due to the American 7th Fleet presence and the start of the Korean War. Hence even now, Taiwan is just a rogue province under rogue rule in a war that was never finished, so China should have the rights to reclaim its own lands.
GoAmerica
QUOTE(DesertFox @ Dec 23 2003, 07:07 PM)
Why does China's HUMAN Rights policies have to do with anything. If you want to complain about human rights, look at Saudi Arabia or Iran.

I think there already is an arms embargo on Iran. Come to think of it, there are sanctions on Iran i believe

Anyways...with China's threatening stance at Taiwan these days, i think dropping the arms embargo is a bad idea and is just inviting disaster
DesertFox
QUOTE(GoAmerica @ Dec 23 2003, 09:02 PM)
QUOTE(DesertFox @ Dec 23 2003, 07:07 PM)
Why does China's HUMAN Rights policies have to do with anything. If you want to complain about human rights, look at Saudi Arabia or Iran.

I think there already is an arms embargo on Iran. Come to think of it, there are sanctions on Iran i believe

Anyways...with China's threatening stance at Taiwan these days, i think dropping the arms embargo is a bad idea and is just inviting disaster

Still no one really cares about Iran though, you dont have protestors going around vying for Iranian human rights...
GoAmerica
QUOTE(DesertFox @ Dec 23 2003, 08:22 PM)
QUOTE(GoAmerica @ Dec 23 2003, 09:02 PM)
QUOTE(DesertFox @ Dec 23 2003, 07:07 PM)
Why does China's HUMAN Rights policies have to do with anything. If you want to complain about human rights, look at Saudi Arabia or Iran.

I think there already is an arms embargo on Iran. Come to think of it, there are sanctions on Iran i believe

Anyways...with China's threatening stance at Taiwan these days, i think dropping the arms embargo is a bad idea and is just inviting disaster

Still no one really cares about Iran though, you dont have protestors going around vying for Iranian human rights...

Wanna bet? Remember the latest Nobel Peace Prize winner? She was an advocate for human rights in Iran and for women in general

Also, there is Amnesty and Human Rights Watch

Then there are the pro-democracy supporters who protest against the Theocratic Rule
Paladin
QUOTE
Why does China's HUMAN Rights policies have to do with anything. If you want to complain about human rights, look at Saudi Arabia or Iran.


Democracies like Taiwan tend to have greater respect for human rights than authoritarian regimes. China's human rights abuses are relevant since the Taiwanese may share the same fate as the Tibetans or the pro-democracy protestors in Tiananmen Square, should China invade.

QUOTE
China is a world power, and it should not be left out of anything major in the world and especially trade, no matter the conditions and its policies.


Would you have opposed arms embargos against Nazi Germany or Imperial Japan in 1940 or 1941? They were world powers at one time. Does might make right?

QUOTE
Taiwan and Tibet were both parts of MAINLAND CHINA. Tibet was always unofficially a sovereign of the Imperial Chinese due to their Buddhist ties.


The Tibetans had their own language, culture and civilization seperate from the Chinese. The fact that they were at one time subjugated by the Chinese did not give China casus belli to again invade and subjugate them in 1950. Do the Turks have a right to reconquer the Arab Middle-East and North Africa? The Arabs after all were part of the Ottoman Empire for hundreds of years. Should Austria have a right to reconquer the Balkans? What about the UK? Can the UK reclaim the Republic of Ireland and Brittany?

QUOTE
Hence even now, Taiwan is just a rogue province under rogue rule in a war that was never finished, so China should have the rights to reclaim its own lands.


The PRC does not have any legitimate right to "reclaim" Taiwan. The government of Taiwan is the original government of China. Taiwan has never been under the rule of the PRC, so any claim of it being a rogue, breakaway province is spurious. The vast majority of Taiwanese were also not born under the boot of the PRC, and do not favor unification.
Ultimatejoe
Lets stay on topic here folks. The question we are debating is Has China made acceptable progress in the area of human rights? We are not discussing the merits of Chinese foreign policy.
This is a simplified version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2021 Invision Power Services, Inc.