Australian Leaders Keep Vow of Silence on China’s Human Rights Record

(Image:  Australian Prime Minister's Office )

Following Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull’s whirlwind visit to China from 14 to 15 April, some are questioning his decision to remain tight-lipped on the country’s human rights record.

With a 1,000-strong entourage of business leaders in tow, the 36-hour trip saw Turnbull reach an agreement to expand Australian and Chinese tourism, announce a $100 million joint research and science program, and sign a deal aimed at raising the profile of Australian football.

While the prime minister assured reporters that human rights issues had also been raised, he made clear such discussions would be kept strictly behind closed doors.

Twitter user Bernie Zarsoff noted the marked difference in tone compared to when Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif visited Australia in March:

Turnbull’s reluctance to disclose specifics is consistent with the tendency for senior Australian officials to avoid publicly confronting China over human rights issues. Earlier this February, Foreign Minister Julie Bishop was similarly unwilling to dish on whether she had expressed concern to her Chinese counterparts about China’s intimidation and detention of at least 170 lawyers:

It seems even a social media “like” violates this self-imposed, unspoken vow of silence.

Days before Turnbull’s trip, Australia’s Treasurer Scott Morrison claimed his account was hacked after appearing to “like” an op-ed — written by Australia Director at Human Rights Watch Elaine Pearson — urging the prime minister to include human rights on the China agenda:

BuzzFeed Australia’s Political Editor Mark Di Stefano was among the first to pick up on Morrison’s unusual Twitter move.

Within an hour, the post was no longer tagged as ‘”iked.” A subsequent tweet from Morrison appeared to blame the slip-up on unauthorized activity.

Australians were quick to jump on the treasurer’s reaction:

When human rights concerns in China are raised publicly, it is usually done on a less personal, more institutional basis. For instance, Australia was one of 12 countries who signed a joint statement at the United Nations Human Rights Council condemning China’s intensified crackdown on human rights activists.

A “frank and constructive exchange of views” also takes place at the infrequent Australia-China Human Rights Dialogue, the last of which was held in February 2014. It was not attended by the prime minister or any senior cabinet minister.

Explaining the silence at the top

Several theories have been put forward to explain the conspicuous silence of senior Australian political figures on human rights in China — incidentally, Australia’s largest trade partner.

Perhaps the most obvious is the government’s need to ensure sensitivities over human rights do not derail the China-Australia Free Trade Agreement (ChAFTA), which recently came into force last December.

The deal, which includes across-the-board tariff reductions for a range of Australian exports, is being enthusiastically spruiked by officials as “[supporting] future economic growth, job creation and higher living standards through increased goods and services trade, and investment.”

Others suggest the government is shying away from imminent charges of hypocrisy, in light of Australia’s much lambasted treatment of asylum seekers and its indigenous population.

There is another possible explanation: Australia’s leaders are simply too well-mannered to call China out.

This article by Fiona So originally appeared on Global Voices

[Note: Materials may be edited for content and length.]

LIKE us on Facebook, or follow us on Twitter.

Should We Be Laughing at This Chinese Toddler for Defending His Grandma?
China: Corrupt Officials May Face Death Penalty