Firstly, these were not just ‘protests’, but violent race-riots. A Swiss tourist described an old (Han-Chinese) man pulled off his bike and then having his head crushed by someone in the mob with a big rock. A mob, according to reports in the Financial Times, also blocked five han-Chinese girls from escaping a burning house.

It seems clear that the Chinese government has a duty to employ the necessary force to stop this.

It is crucial that we find out how exactly they have done this. If it is true that they have shot tens of people that is of course serious. But before condeming that we need to know if it is true.

The Dalai Llama is not a legitimate representative of the Tibetan people. He was not elected. The Dalai Llama system that existed before the communists rule is highly romanticized in the West. It seems uncontroversial that the living standards are now much higher. More controversially, it may be that the human rights situation, although bad, was actually worse under the old system. There was widespread slavery and a ‘justice’ system employing cruel and unusual punishments.

It is in addition rich of the West to act superior on human rights, given all we know about the human rights abuses in the war on terror. We should care about the people in China, yes. We should speak out when necessary, yes. We should however not use these occasions to establish moral superiority over the Chinese. That is unfair and furthermore counterproductive, since they will not listen if they perceive the criticism as ill-meaning.

Another little mentioned aspect of this story is that the riots coincide with recent price rises on basic goods, connected with the high inflation in China. It appears, from a report in the Financial Times, that ethnic Tibetans blame these rises on the Han-Chinese, who are often the suppliers of these goods.

I agree that Europe should take a more active role in promoting Human rights in China and elsewhere. But we should do this from a humble stand-point and make sure that we understand the issues at hand.

Thank you for the quick reply.

The Chinese government is indeed a serious human rights abuser in many regards, in particular on freedom of speech, rights to fair trial, freedom from torture and on the use of capital punishment. This is sad, but an undeniable fact.

Whilst Western governments, and other democracies worldwide, treat their citizens much better than that domestically, the human rights abuses e.g. in Iraq are certainly comparable. Actually in terms of the number of people killed, they are worse. This goes on as we speak, and we are completely failing to hold people to account for it. I realise that this is not the topic of debate here, but nevertheless want to point that out because I think we should not presume moral superiority over China. In either case there is always something disturbing about people imagining they are morally superior.

Should we really presume to know that a majority of Tibetans want the Dalai Llama back? Unless we know this, I think the Chinese government should not be pushed into engaging the Dalai Llama. We should also be aware that the Dalai Llama has worked closely with the CIA which makes it all the more difficult for the Chinese government to trust him. However, it seems safe to demand that they should grant the ethnic Tibetans, and all others under their responsibility, their human rights.

I agree that the EU has not been trying sufficiently hard to improve the human rights situation in China and fully support Mrs Merkel’s efforts. I think what is needed is for the whole of the EU to try harder, but also to try in a different way.

My impression is that there is still a hardness of attitudes sometimes in China which stands in the way of empathy. I suspect this is a leftover in the culture from the wars and suffering of the last century. We must consider what is the most effective way to change this.

We must avoid further hardening attitudes by turning this into a competition of moral superiority between the West and China.

I have tried different approaches of discussing human rights with Chinese friends. I find what works best is to firstly make it clear that one is pro-Chinese, in the sense of wanting the people in China to be happy. Then I point out that it is amazing how the living standards are improving for so many people. Only then would I explain how, from the European learning-experience, human rights are also necessary for a harmonious and happy society.

As another example,  I was at a conference in China where, at a dinner-speech, a European brought up the animosity between Chinese and Japanese. He described how his life had been affected by the French-German animosity in Europe and how that was overcome. This message got across I think.

If we want to change peoples’ behaviour we need to change the way they think. In the short term we can try to force them to do this or that, but the only way to really change things is to understand and engage with the psyche of China.