It’s always tempting to only talk with countries that share our values, rather like a conversation that takes place between members of the same family. In my opinion, this is because the majority of the world is not democratic. Some one hundred countries have human rights policies that are distressing or, at least, less than stellar.
Curiously, in my opinion, it’s more important to have a dialogue with countries with shortcomings or difficulties, even if, at the end of the day, we’re not on the same wavelength. Simply engaging in a conversation with these countries at least provides an opportunity to advance the dialogue.
For its part, China is a country with a challenging culture. It’s a country with great international weight and a long tradition.
I have the bruises and scars.
This is due to years of interaction with the Chinese on difficult subjects such as human rights.
The fact remains that it’s necessary. From time to time, we find a way to communicate, even with the Chinese. For example, some twenty years ago, with the Canadian International Development Agency, there were discussions on prison management, in which I was not directly involved even though I was on the China mission. How was this possible? It turned out that part of the problem was a lack of knowledge. China was willing to consider improving certain aspects of its penal system. However, I’m not naive. The Chinese are still going to put people in jail who wouldn’t be incarcerated in Canada. The list of offences is long in China.
I am optimistic, however. Indeed, in the case of China, if we can change 1% or even a fraction of 1% of the policy, a very large number of people will be affected. That said, do I think that tomorrow or the next day, the situation will be much better for Uyghurs, Tibetans and religious minorities? Not at all.
On the other hand, we can at least maintain contact and keep the dialogue open, in the hope of seeing changes. If we don’t communicate, if we don’t engage, we surely won’t see improvements.