国际奥委会的责任及欧盟与中国的贸易

-- 魏京生

最近有关中国人权状况的批评声调再度升高。欧洲议会批评中国政府违背诺言，没有改善人权也没有开放新闻自由。并且通过了决议，要求国际奥委会督促中国政府改善人权。在此之前，我在欧洲议会的会议中发言，提出了国际奥委会的责任问题。会议是由欧洲议会中的自由和民主联盟举办，议题围绕着欧洲应如何推动其它国家的和平和民主化的问题。中国的奥运和人权问题，以及对华武器禁运的问题，也成为会议最重要的议题。

在欧盟的会议之后，中国民运的代表们又在瑞士的日内瓦聚集，就中国的人权问题和奥运会的问题举行了新闻发布会。虽然中共方面采取了各种技术手段阻止，仍然有十一名西方媒体的记者到会采访，所提的问题也十分内行和尖锐。

首先是国际奥委会的责任和态度问题。有些人认为中国的人权状况应该由中国政府负责，奥委会只负责组织运动会就可以了，没有改变中国政治的责任。在过去，这种说法是对的。这一次就略有不同了。中国政府申请主办2000奥运会失败之后，国际奥委会的官员们就意识到了：中国的人权记录太糟糕，是影响申办的主要原因。由于种种原因，国际奥委会的主要官员必须帮助中国申请到主办权。所以他们商量出一个办法：由中共公开保证在奥运会之前大幅度改善人权状况，再由国际奥委会公开确认中共兑现了这个承诺，并由国际奥委会的主要负责人用这个理由说服委员们，绕过人权问题的障碍，帮助中共申请到了2008年奥运会的主办权。

由于有这个特殊的程序，所以不但中国政府有义务兑现它的诺言，作为担保人的国际奥委会也有责任督促中国政府改善人权，开放言论自由。这不是别人强加给国际奥委会的责任，而是它自己帮助中国申办时已经做出的承诺。国际奥委会的主席可以换人，但责任不可以推卸。它必须去做它应该做的事情：去督促中国政府改善人权，保护公民的自由权利；并就此事务向国际社会做出报告，清楚地说明中国是否兑现了它的诺言；哪些方面有所改进，哪些方面严重不足。这种报告本身也是对中国政府的监督。没有这种监督，中国政府自然会不当一回事儿，必然不会遵守它自己的诺言。

几年来的情况证明了人们的预料。国际奥委会帮助中国完成了申办之后，从来没有就中国是否改善人权发表过任何看法，更没有定期报告中国人权状况是否有所改善，以及改善的程度是否符合它的承诺。这是否可以说明国际奥委会的主要官员，与中共合伙欺骗全世界呢？现在还不能断言。但有一点非常清楚，国际奥委会的前任和现任的官员们，放弃了他们监督的责任，放任中共政权违背承诺。特别是在担保人没有尽到责任时，问题就非常清楚了。

在日内瓦的新闻发布会之后，海外民运的代表们驱车前往洛桑的国际奥委会总部，送交海内外几万中国人的七封联名信，并与奥委会的官员会谈。法新社和瑞士电视台的摄制组也随同前往。在奥委会总部，公共关系负责人戴维斯女士和她的助手收取了联名信，并与海外民运的代表们进行了十五分钟的会谈。由于过于紧张，戴维斯女士要求电视台的记者不要拍摄。惹得习惯于新闻自由的记者十分愤怒。在接下来的谈话中，奥委会方面也缺乏起码的诚意。面对几万失地农民的痛苦；面对被强迫拆迁的市民的灾难，她只能反复陈述奥委会是个体育组织，她似乎忘记了中国政府申奥时的承诺和奥委会对这个承诺的担保。但她没有重复奥运和人权无关的立场。她只说负责向主席转达我们的意见。

海外民运则由主席魏京生表达了几点意见：第一，要求国际奥委会负起监督的责任。并强调不是可做可不做，而是他们必须承担的责任。第二，就是应该公开解释，中国的人权状况是否符合申办时承诺的大幅度改善。第三，是就中国官员流传出来的向奥委会官员行贿的问题，作一个公开的澄清。戴维斯女士也很关注中国因筹办奥运会而侵犯百姓利益的情况，并希望能获得更多的信息。我也向她表示还会就此问题再次与他们联系。我们希望奥委会是个负责任的机构。

海外民运的朋友们在瑞士日内瓦和洛桑的活动结束后，我再一次返回到布鲁塞尔欧盟的总部，参加欧洲议会自由民主联盟举行的另一场会议。这场会议的主题只有一个，就是关注中国人权，抵制2008年北京奥运会。它的题目是：“中国的人权 -- 没有金牌”。来自中国内地和新疆、西藏的代表们，与来自大赦国际、无疆界记者、无疆界人权协会的欧洲专家们，详细评述了近年来中国人权状况恶化在各个方面的表现。大家一致认为国际奥委会不应该对此置若罔闻。应该对中国政府违背诺言的行为有所批评甚至有所行动。会议的决议对中国政府兑现它的诺言所应该改进的事务，做了详细明确的说明。

在这之前，在欧盟与中国的关系中发生了一件大事。胡锦涛政权认为欧洲大选之后，新政府经验不足，因而有机可乘，于是对欧洲展开了新一轮的订单外交。在法国新总统萨科奇访问北京期间，用总共三百亿美元的飞机、核电站的订单给了萨科奇一份厚礼。没有经验的萨科奇政府立刻欢欣鼓舞的充当了胡锦涛的游说大使，企图说服欧盟国家不再关心中国的人权。并且声称将会说服欧盟各国同意解除对中国的武器禁运。萨科奇式的立场在欧洲包括德国执政联盟中制造了分裂。社会民主党的副总理兼外长，在公开场合抨击总理默克尔。说她因关心中国的人权、并会见了达赖喇嘛而丢掉了大笔的生意，而且是丢给了竞争对手法国等等。一时间中国的生意炙手可热，有良知的政治家们敢怒不敢言。

针对中共的这一阴谋，我在欧洲议会中的发言及时地提醒欧洲国家注意：中共可以指定贸易对象的做法，正是它实行不公平贸易政策的结果。也正是这种受到严格控制的不公平的贸易，造成了欧盟对中国贸易的每年两千亿美元逆差。萨科奇的三百亿美元订单即使全部兑现，也抵消不了日益迅速增长的已达每年两千亿美元的逆差。造成逆差的另一个原因，就是中国的工人没有权利为自己争取比较公平的工资和劳动保障。中国的人权问题，恰恰和欧洲人的经济利益有关。被远远小于两千亿的订单收买，就去帮助中共侵犯中国人民的人权，恰恰是在出卖欧洲人民的利益，而不是给欧洲人民带来利益。

三百亿的订单虽然解决了一小部分法国企业和工人的问题。但更多的法国中小企业和欧盟其他国家的利益怎么办？这正是短视的政治家所看不到的问题。中共的订单外交表面上看是成功了。法国的萨科奇兴高采烈地公开充当了胡锦涛的说客。欧洲的一些短视的政客们也开始动摇了。但这个自以为是的外交谋略引起的另一种反应，却是胡锦涛的参谋们始料不及的。萨科奇的自私自利的表现，引起了欧洲其他国家极大的愤慨。这种愤慨还将继续酝酿发酵，使法国在欧洲外交中更加孤立，并失去在欧盟对外政策中的主导地位。结果是中共用三百亿订单搬起了一块巨大的石头，落下来却砸了自己朋友的脚。也顺便砸了胡锦涛自己的脚。

在这次会议中就有欧盟的议员肯定地告诉我：在我们去洛桑国际奥委会总部访问的同时，欧洲议会就2008奥运和对华军售通过了决议。这个决议是全体一致通过的，因此不同于已往的决议。欧洲各国都不会在武器禁运的问题上给萨科奇留下可乘之机。而且会更积极地给国际奥委会施加压力，反对2008北京奥运会。

大家都认为我的发言说出了大家的心里话。不仅考虑到了中国人民的利益，而且考虑到了欧洲人的利益。欧洲政界和媒体非常重视我的看法。而中共那种总在算计别人的所谓谋略，每一次都会搬起石头砸了自己的脚。

（写于2007年12月, 并于同月在自由亚洲电台播出。）

Responsibility of the International Olympic Committee and Result of Europe’s Trade with China

-- Wei Jingsheng

Recently the voice of criticism of China's human rights situation has sounded once again.  The European Parliament criticized the Chinese government for failing to keep its promises; the Chinese government has not improved human rights and has not permitted free press. Moreover, the European Parliament passed a resolution to demand the International Olympic Committee’r role on Chinese government’s human rights issue. Before that, I spoke at a conference hold in the European Parliament and raised the problem of the responsibility of the International Olympic Committee. The conference was hosted by the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) group of the European Parliament; the topics of the conference revolved around the Europe's role of promoting peace and democracy of other countries. The issues of China's Olympics and human rights, and the issue of the arms embargo on China were also the important issues.

After the conference at the European Parliament, representatives of the Chinese democracy movement gathered in Geneva of Switzerland.  We held a press conference to address the issue of the Beijing Olympics and human rights problems in China.  Although the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) employed all sorts of technical tricks and means to prevent the conference, there were still eleven Western media reporters who came to the press conference to conduct interviews.  The questions raised were expert and sharp.

First we discussed the issue of the attitude and responsibility of the International Olympic Committee (IOC).  Some people think that the human rights conditions in China are the responsibility of the Chinese government, the IOC is only to organize the Olympic Games, instead of carrying the responsibility of changing the Chinese politics.  In the past, this sort of thinking was correct.  But this time, things are relatively different. After the Chinese government's first application to host the Olympic Games in 2000 failed, IOC officials realized that China's human rights record was too poor; it was the most important factor influencing China's application to host the Olympics.  For various reasons, principal officials of the IOC had to help China to get the right to host the Olympics. So they came up with a way: the Communist Party government publicly pledges to substantially improve human rights conditions before the Olympic Games, and then the IOC can publicly confirm that the CCP has honored its pledge. Thus they were able to convince the committee members, and bypassing this barrier of the human rights problem, and finally helped the CCP to successfully apply for the right to host the 2008 Olympic Games.

Because of this special process, not only does the Chinese government have an obligation to fulfill its promises, the IOC as the guarantor also has a responsibility to urge the Chinese government to improve human rights and allow free speech. This responsibility is not being imposed on the IOC by anyone; rather it is the promise the IOC made when it helped China apply for the Olympics. The IOC president may change, but the responsibility of the IOC cannot be shirked. The IOC must do what it is obliged to take care of.  It ought to urge the Chinese government to improve human rights, and safeguard people's freedoms and rights.  It ought to make a report of this matter to the international community and make clear whether China has or has not fulfilled its promises: what aspects have improved, what areas are critical and lack of progress.  This sort of report is itself a way to supervise the Chinese government.  Without this sort of supervision, the Chinese government will naturally make nothing of the matter.  It is inevitable that they will not abide by their own promises.

The situation over the last few years has proved people's predictions. After the IOC helped China in its bid for the Olympic Games, it has not published any statements as to whether or not China has improved human rights. Even less have they provided regular reports as to whether the human rights situation in China has improved, and whether or not the improvements are to meet that China promised.  Can we not say then that the IOC's key official has colluded with the CCP to trick the whole world? At this point we cannot yet make this assertion.  But there is something that is very clear, former and current head IOC officials have given up their responsibility to supervise, allowing the Communist regime to violate its own promises. The problem is particularly clear in that the IOC has failed to do its best as guarantor that the Chinese keep their promises.

After the press conference in Geneva, representatives of the overseas Chinese democracy movement drove to the IOC headquarters in Lausanne, Switzerland.  We delivered seven petition letters signed by tens of thousands of Chinese both in and out of China; we also sat down and discussed matters with IOC officials. Agence France-Presse and Swiss television's production unit also accompanied us to the IOC headquarters.  At the IOC headquarters, communications director Ms. Davies and her assistant received the petition letters and sat down for fifteen minutes with representatives of the overseas democracy movement to discuss matters. Because Ms. Davies was overly nervous, she requested the television reporters not video taping the conversation.  This aroused the ire of reporters who are accustomed to great media freedom.  During the discussion with the IOC representatives, the IOC seemed to lack the most basic sincerity: facing the suffering of tens of thousands of peasants who had lost their land, in the face of the misfortune of people who have been forcibly relocated and had their house razed, she was only able to repeat over and over that the Olympic Committee is an athletic organization.  She seems to have forgotten the promises the Chinese government made when applying for the Olympics and the guarantee the IOC made to uphold them. But she did not repeat the position that the Olympics are unrelated to human rights.  She just said that she would be sure to pass on our opinions to the president of IOC.

The overseas democracy movement had chairman Wei Jingsheng express several points. First, we request that the IOC shoulder the responsibility to supervise China.  And it was emphasized that it is not something the IOC may do, or may not do; rather it is a responsibility they must bear. Second, that the IOC ought to make a public statement as to whether or not the human rights situation has improved substantially in accord with the promises China made when applying to host the Olympics. Third, the IOC ought to make a clear public statement regarding bribery to IOC officials circulating from Chinese officials. Ms. Davies was very interested in the situation of those whose property was infringed upon as China prepares for the Olympics. She also hoped to learn more about this situation.  I expressed to her that I would contact them again with more information about this issue. We hope that the International Olympic Committee will be a responsible organization.

After the activities of the overseas democracy movement in Geneva and Lausanne were over, I returned to EU's headquarters in Brussels to attend another conference sponsored by the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE) group of the European Parliament. This conference only had one topic: paying attention to human rights in China and boycotting the 2008 Beijing Olympics.  It is called: "Human Rights in China - No Olympic Medal". Representatives came from within China proper, from Xinjiang, and from Tibet, and experts came from Amnesty International, Reporters without Borders, and Human Rights Without Frontiers, etc. These experts made detailed presentations as to how the human rights situation in China has deteriorated in recent years on all levels.  Everyone was in agreement that the International Olympic Committee should not simply pay no attention to this matter. As to China's conduct of violating its promises, the IOC ought to criticize China even to the point of taking action. At the completion of the conference, we had composed a detailed and explicit statement as to how the Chinese government ought to improve human rights so as to honor the promises it made previously.

Prior to this conference, an important event took place in the relationship between China and the European Union.  Hu Jintao's regime believed that after the European elections the new governments would lack experience, thus there would be loopholes to exploit.  Thus the CCP began a new cycle of contract diplomacy with Europe. While newly elected French president Sarkozy visited Beijing, the CCP presented a deal of US $30 billion order in airplanes and nuclear power plants as lavish gifts for Sarkozy. The inexperienced Sarkozy government was instantly elated and willing to act as Hu Jintao's ambassador to attempt to convince the countries of the European Union to no longer concern themselves with China's human rights situation. Moreover, he professed that in the future he would convince EU countries to agree to lift the arms embargo on China.  This kind of stand on China led to division in Europe, including the ruling coalition in Germany.  The Social Democratic Party's Frank-Walter Steinmeier, vice chancellor as well as the minister of foreign affairs promptly made a public attack on Chancellor Angela Merkel. They said she concerned herself with China's human rights and met with the Dalai Lama and thus lost a lot of business contracts with China, and that they were lost to their competitor, France.  At a time when business with China is scorching hot, politicians with a conscience are forced to rage in silent fury.

While speaking at the European Parliament, I reminded European countries to pay attention to this plot directed by the CCP.  The fact that the CCP determines the way its trading partners is exactly the result of its unfair trading practices.  And it is also this sort of strict control and unfair trading that has caused the EU to amass a rapid increased trade deficit of 200 billion US dollars a year with China. Even if Sarkozy's 30 billion deals were honored in full, it would not offset the trade deficit of more than 200 billion.  Another cause of the trade deficit is that China's workers do not have the right to compete for a fair salary and guaranteed labor rights.  China's human rights problems are exactly tied to Europeans' economic interests. To be bought out by deals which are much less than the 200 billion in deficit, and then help the CCP infringe on the Chinese people's rights is actually selling out on the Europeans' interests, instead of bring benefit for the Europeans.

Although 30 billion may resolve a small part of French industry and workers' problems, but what about the interests of even more of France's small and mid-sized industry as well as other European Union countries?  This is exactly the problem that shortsighted politicians cannot see.  On the surface it appears that the CCP's contract-diplomacy was successful.  France's Sarkozy was more than happy to publicly serve as Hu Jintao's lobbyist.  Some of Europe's other shortsighted politicians have also begun to waver.  But this overly confident foreign policy strategy has also caused a different reaction, and it is not as good as what Hu Jintao's advisors originally expected.  Sarkozy's display of selfishness has caused other European countries to become extremely indignant.  And this indignation will continue to ferment and brew, isolating France in European foreign policy, causing France to loose its dominant position in forming European Union foreign policy. In the end, the CCP used 30 billion trade deals to move a huge boulder, but dropped it and broke its friend's foot, and in passing broke Hu Jintao's own foot as well.

At this conference in the European Parliament, some members of the European Parliament confirmed to me: while we were visiting IOC in Lausanne, at the same time, the European Parliament passed a resolution about the 2008 Olympics and its stand on arms embargo to China. This unanimously passed resolution is different from resolutions in the past.  No European country will give Sarkozy any chance to maneuver on the issue of the arms embargo on China. And furthermore, they will even more actively put pressure on the International Olympic Committee, and oppose the 2008 Beijing Olympics.

They said that when I spoke I said what they were all feeling in their hearts. Not only did it take into account the interests of the Chinese people, but also the interests of the Europeans. European political circles and media highly value my opinion. And yet the CCP's style of always calculating and trying to take advantage of other people will always be like moving a rock and dropping it on their own feet.

(Written and broadcasted by Radio Free Asia in December 2007.)