Australia's Foreign Minister had to resort to scouring Chinese news websites to get updates on the fate of Stern Hu and the most senior Chinese official he managed to get clarification from apparently was a junior minister in the foreign department. The opposition have been demanding that Australia's Prime Minister Kevin Rudd pick up the phone and speak to his counterpart, the 'Even Sterner Hu', China's president Hu Jin Tao. Kevin Rudd has so far refused citing 'quiet diplomacy' as the way to go. The opposition have pointed out that Kevin Rudd's self proclaimed 'special relationship' he has with China as worthless.
It's been more than three weeks and Stern Hu lingers in a China jail awaiting charges. It must be noted that so far no charges have been laid, making it difficult for the Australian authorities to make sense or further commentary on this issue without risking offending Australia's largest trade partner. Australian's have to know that if you visit or do business in a foreign country, then you abide by the laws of that country. In this perspective it is hard for the Rudd government to push for the release of Mr Hu because of the lack of information on what laws have been broken. Rio Tinto have issued a strong worded statement rubbishing the allegations by the Chinese Authorities and proclaiming to be steadfast in support of their employees.
The interesting point to this whole saga is this. Even at the face of such blatant abuse of the human rights of an Australian citizen, the Australian government has chosen 'quiet diplomacy' which to me means weakness and even as unsophisticated my anaylsis is of the whole situation, is it that far from the truth? Of course Australia is showing weakness, what other observations can we make? Under intense pressure to do more, Kevin Rudd came out and stated in his press conference that the way China handled this investigation 'would be watched and judged by the whole world'. How would this make a difference, considering the world has been watching China abuse Tibet for decades and this doesn't seem to be affecting much the way China conducts itself. Moreover, coming from Australia, a country that is dominated in the economic relationship with China this 'warning' must surely be mute as far as the Chinese are concerned. Sure enough twenty four hours later, a Chinese Government spokesman came out guns ablaze asking Australia to butt out if it knew what was good for it. The US, in support of Australia and maybe having gone through this many times before thought it be helpful to help out it's 'younger brother' by asking China to conduct investigations in a fair and transparent manner without further delay.
To see Australia limp through this speaks volumes for the economic dependance Australia has on the Chinese and their demand for Australia's mining resources, mainly iron ore. Australia's numbness in dealing with what on the surface appears to be a human rights issue is surprising but I would ask anyone willing to condemn so willingly to take a step back and understand the 'other issues' that may be affected by pushing the boundaries with the Chinese Authorities on the Stern Hu issue. Yes, you would like to think that Australians would sleep in a tent first before letting one of it's own linger in prison without trial but unfortunately life is not as clear cut as that. Analyst on both sides of the economic spectrum have so accurately surmized, Australia needs China more than China needs Australia. Protecting the econmic prosperity of Australia's other 24 million and their future generations may have something to do with.
No comments:
Post a Comment