17 November 2004

United States Summarizes EU Arms Embargo Against China, November 17, 2004

(Serious human rights abuses that sparked U.S., EU embargoes continue)

The U.S. Department of State released the following fact sheet November 17 outlining the European Union (EU) arms embargo against China:
(begin fact sheet)

U.S. Department of State
International Information Programs
Washington, D.C.
November 17, 2004

Fact Sheet: EU Arms Embargo Against China

"The European Council, recalling the declaration of the twelve of June 6, [...] strongly condemns the brutal repression taking place in China. It expresses its dismay at the pursuit of executions in spite of all the appeals of the international community. It solemnly requests the Chinese authorities to stop the executions and to put an end to the repressive actions against those who legitimately claim their democratic rights.

The European Council requests the Chinese authorities to respect human rights and to take into account the hopes for freedom and democracy deeply felt by the population. It underlines that this is an essential element for the pursuit of the policy of reforms and openness that has been supported by the European Community and its member states."

European Council Declaration on China: Madrid, 26-27 June 1989

Background: The European Union imposed an arms embargo on China on June 27, 1989, in response to the Chinese government's brutal repression of protestors calling for democratic and political reform.

While the protests were widespread, the most infamous repression took place June 3-4 at Tiananmen Square, where the Chinese army is believed to have killed or injured hundreds of unarmed protestors. To date, no one has been held accountable for the large number of deaths. Some protesters are still imprisoned, sentenced on the basis of trials that did not meet international standards.

In tandem with the European Union, the United States imposed restrictions on arms sales to China after the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.

THE SERIOUS HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES THAT SPARKED THE U.S. AND EU EMBARGOES CONTINUE

- The United States welcomes the developing partnership between the European Union (EU) and China. But while the United States supports and encourages European efforts to enhance these ties, it does not believe that lifting the embargo imposed in 1989 contributes to this goal.

- Economic growth and the protection of human rights are not mutually exclusive; the embargo does not restrict China's capacity to promote economic growth at home.

- In adopting the initial arms embargo, the European Council "condemned the brutal repression taking place in China" and "solemnly requested the Chinese authorities to put an end to the repressive actions against those who legitimately claim their democratic rights."

- The U.S. and European prohibitions on arms sales to China are complementary in the U.S. view, were imposed for the same reasons, specifically serious human rights abuses, and those reasons remain valid today. The United States is committed to maintaining its arms embargo until those human rights concerns are no longer valid.

- While the Chinese government has taken some steps to improve the human rights situation, there are still serious abuses. China's human rights practices still fall far short of international standards and point to a need to maintain the embargo.

- The embargo on arms sales to China is not outmoded. It is just as important to champion human rights today as it was in 1989 when we witnessed the fall of the Berlin Wall.

- The arms embargo should remain a key part of EU efforts to support human rights in China. Maintaining the embargo is important to convey the message that Europe cares about human rights worldwide. It sends the right signal to China that Europe is still concerned about its human rights record.

LIFTING ARMS EMBARGO ALSO RUNS COUNTER TO EU STRATEGIC INTERESTS

- Neither is lifting the China arms embargo in Europe's strategic interests. No current mechanisms exist to prevent China from transferring technology and lethal weaponry to other, less stable regions of the world, or to use it for the purposes of internal repression.

- Ending the EU embargo will also have a negative impact on Asian regional and cross-Strait stability.

THE EU CODE OF CONDUCT IS AN INADEQUATE SUBSTITUTE

- European advocates of ending the embargo have pointed out that without the embargo, there could be some limits on sales of arms to China through the EU Code of Conduct.

- The EU Code of Conduct has not been sufficient and is not legally binding. The EU Code of Conduct, even if strengthened, cannot be considered a substitute to control arms sales to China. It has not deterred the sales of millions of euros of dangerous technology thus far.

- We would welcome EU efforts to improve the minimal export control standards contained in the Code of Conduct, but it should be done in a manner that continues to signal to China that human rights and relations with its neighbors do matter.

LIFTING THE EMBARGO COULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT THE TRANSATLANTIC ALLIANCE

- Lifting the embargo could potentially also have a negative impact on U.S. defense cooperation with EU members. Congress has already flagged this issue and a recent House version of the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) contained provisions that would preclude the Department of Defense from procuring defense articles or services from any "foreign person" who transfers defense items to China.

(end fact sheet)