By Andrew O’Malley Shand

In the wake of any great crisis the question ‘who is to blame?’ is often the first on many peoples’ minds. Yet this question is deeper and more complex than any simple answer. If there is something or someone to point to as the cause of a problem, then what circumstances allowed the blameworthy acts to occur in the first instance?

Fingers are pointing in every direction over who has botched the response to Covid-19 the most — silencing of whistle-blowers and obstructionism from the People’s Republic of China (PRC), flattery and parroting by the World Health Organisation of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) data and official documents it could not fully verify, and in the United States where President Trump took ‘America First’ to include Covid-19 case numbers while deflecting every piece of criticism. Amongst this madness, New Zealand is widely receiving praise, whilst the WHO is being slammed and defunded – but would New Zealand have made any better decision making than the WHO in engagement with the PRC?

Some of the WHO’s mistakes include repeating CCP claims in mid-January that there is no evidence the virus can be transmitted between humans, condemning Australia and the United States for inciting ‘fear and stigma’ for denying travellers from PRC in mid-February and claiming that there was "no reason for measures that unnecessarily interfere with international travel and trade".

The WHO also failed to classify Covid-19 as a pandemic until 11 March, after 120,000 confirmed cases among 114 countries and 4400 deaths.  Director General of the WHO praised the PRC’s ‘transparency’ and ‘top leadership.’ Perhaps he was referring to the PRC’s police investigation of Dr Li Wenliang for ‘spreading rumours’, who in December attempted to warn other health professionals of a SARS-like virus that had infected seven Wuhan locals. Dr Li succumbed to the virus himself in January.

One of the key points that has been raised in defence of the World Health Organisation is that organisation has no intelligence or investigative powers of its own. In this instance, the WHO needed voluntary cooperation and transparency from the PRC. Furthermore, in case of a future crisis, the WHO and world health would presumably benefit from a good relationship with the PRC.

Whatever the case may be, it stands that the WHO failed to criticise or question the information coming out of the PRC enough. In the position of the WHO, the PRC is simply too powerful to critique and to question such a leviathan would be to threaten the relationship between the WHO and the PRC, and the information from that relationship, that a future crisis and many lives may depend on. All-in-all, these are noble defences for the mistakes of the WHO. However, by relaying official reports and claims from an authoritarian regime to the world public, seemingly uncritically, the WHO compromised on integrity. This compromise and propagation of misinformation may cost thousands of lives during this pandemic and may erode trust in the WHO.

Similarly, in exchange for a positive relationship, both diplomatic and economic, many nation states compromise their integrity by remaining silent on the endemic human rights abuses, geopolitical bullying, and resource exploitation by the PRC both domestically and internationally. This includes New Zealand.

For example, in Greater Tibet, as claimed by exile groups, or the smaller Tibet Autonomous Region as designated by China, a process of “cultural genocide” is underway in his homeland according to the Dalai Lama, who fled Tibet in 1959. Tibetans are an ethnically, culturally, linguistically, and religiously distinct people. Like the rest of China, Tibet suffered greatly during the Cultural Revolution, with between 200,000 and 1,000,000 Tibetans reported to have died and approximately 6,000 Tibetan-Buddhist monasteries ransacked and destroyed by the CCP.

Currently, near total control on freedoms of movement, religion, language, and other cultural rights target effectively every aspect of Tibetan life. The Tibetan cultural landscape is further threatened by the PRC’s encouragement of mass migration into Tibet and other ethnic minority regions, such as Xinjiang, by way of cash bonuses and favourable living conditions.

A narrative of delegitimisation by the CCP of Tibetan society has been underway for decades. This helps to justify the repressive rule and control of Tibet and undermines the Dalai Lama’s campaign for greater Tibetan autonomy. Furthermore, any complaints by Tibetans are condemned as separatism, a criminal offence of ‘undermining national unity’.

A 1992 Amnesty International report in relation to Tibet charged the CPP with keeping political prisoners, including the death penalty in its penal code, ill-treatment of detainees, and inaction in the face of ill-treatment of detainees including: torture, the use of the death penalty, and extrajudicial executions.

A 2019 report by Human Rights Watch noted that “authorities in Tibetan areas continue to severely restrict religious freedom, speech, movement, and assembly, and fail to redress popular concerns about mining and land grabs by local officials, which often involve intimidation and arbitrary violence by security forces. Authorities intensified surveillance of online and phone communications.”

In 2017, The Huffington post wrote a scathing article of New Zealand’s failure to address and implicit condoning of the PRC’s human rights abuses. Some examples noted were New Zealand’s failure to sign a 2016 United Nations Human Rights Council statement denouncing the PRC’s abuses of human rights lawyers or sign a joint letter with other governments in February 2017 expressing concern about torture. Furthermore, In October 2016, Deputy Prime Minister Bill English cancelled a meeting with respected Hong Kong democracy leaders Martin Lee and Anson Chan at the eleventh hour, stating but not explaining that it was “diplomatically sensitive” to meet them.

In June, it will be a decade since former Green Co-Leader Russell Norman embarked on a small protest against the human rights abuses of the visiting Xi Jinping’s government. For the crime of proclaiming ‘freedom for the people of Tibet’ and waving a Tibetan flag on the steps of the New Zealand Parliament in Wellington, Dr Norman was manhandled by Xi’s entourage and had his flag taken. No charges were laid against any person. Prime Minister John Key subsequently apologised to Mr Xi.

For a country that propagates itself as an example of ‘global leadership’ in ‘global human rights issues’, New Zealand is ignoring the big red elephant in the room.

Both the WHO and the New Zealand government have compromised their integrity in their acceptance and compliance with the CCP. So while the WHO may be under scrutiny for their flattery of China’s response and relay of misinformation, we must consider the role and complicity of our own governments in their silence on human rights abuses within the PRC. Is our Government any more critical when economic growth may be threatened? Perhaps not. After all, there’s milk powder to flog.

The views expressed in the posts and comments of this blog do not necessarily reflect those of the Equal Justice Project. They should be understood as the personal opinions of the author. No information on this blog will be understood as official. The Equal Justice Project makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information on this site or found by following any link on this site. The Equal Justice Project will not be liable for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information.

Featured image source: Evgeny Nelmin on Pixabay