UK-PRC HUMAN RIGHTS DIALOGUE POSTPONED AFTER

C O N F I D E N T I A L SECTION 01 OF 02 BEIJING 000005 SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 01/04/2030 TAGS: PREL PHUM PGOV SOCI CH SUBJECT: UK-PRC HUMAN RIGHTS DIALOGUE POSTPONED AFTER SHAIKH EXECUTION Classified By: Acting Political Section Chief Ben Moeling. Reasons 1.4 (b) and (d). ¶1. (C) Summary: On December 29 British citizen Akmal Shaikh, who the UK government had asserted was mentally ill, was executed for narcotics charges. On the same day the Chinese government notified the UK that it was indefinitely postponing the January session of the annual UK-PRC bilateral human rights dialogue. British diplomats speculated that UK government statements condemning the execution and criticizing China's human rights record angered the Chinese government and resulted in the PRC decision to postpone of the dialogue. British statements on December 28 and 29 noted that China had "failed in its basic human rights responsibilities," and that "China ...will only ever achieve full respect around the world when it subscribes to basic standards of human rights." End Summary. UK-PRC Bilateral Human Rights Dialogue "Postponed" -------------- -------------- ¶2. (C) On December 31, UK Embassy Second Secretary Sean Winnett told PolOff that, on the same day as the execution of British citizen Akmal Shaikh in Xinjiang and the subsequent UK condemnation of the execution, the Chinese had "postponed" the planned January 12-13 session of the annual UK-PRC bilateral human rights dialogue (HRD). The Chinese informed the British Embassy of the postponement through a curt phone call at 5:00 pm on December 29 from MFA Human Rights Division Second Secretary Liu Guiming to Winnett. During the call Winnett said Liu appeared to be reading from a text and spoke only in Chinese. She did not respond to any questions from Winnett about her delivered points. There had been no response to subsequent requests for written notification of the postponement, Winnett said, and no reason was given for the decision to postpone. ¶3. (C) Winnett said the UK was not seeking new dates for the dialogue at this time. The UK government had hoped to hold the UK-PRC HRD on January 12-13 in advance of a late January UK-PRC Summit. However, the Prime Minister's office ceased "exploring" dates for a summit "a few weeks" before Christmas, for domestic political reasons. (Note: The last UK-PRC HRD was held on January 11, 2009.) Winnett noted that prior to the Chinese postponement, the UK had been pressured by U.S.-based human rights NGOs and activists to cancel the dialogue in protest. The NGOs had asserted that it would be inconceivable for the UK sit across from the Chinese to discuss progress on rule of law and other human rights issues of concern after the Shaikh execution, Winnett said. Chinese Upset by British Government Statements? -------------- -- ¶4. (C) Winnett speculated that UK government statements made prior to and immediately following the December 29 execution had angered the Chinese government and directly led to the postponement of the human rights dialogue. Specifically, Winnett highlighted a December 28 statement to the media in which Foreign Office State Minister Ivan Lewis related having told Chinese Ambassador to the UK Fu Ying that China had "failed in its basic human rights responsibilities" and that "China...will only ever achieve full respect around the world when it subscribes to basic standards of human rights." In an official statement, issued December 29, UK Prime Minister Gordon Brown said he was "appalled and disappointed" that the Chinese government had ignored repeated appeals for clemency in Shaikh's case. Winnett believed that it was Lewis' comments that had prompted the Chinese decision to postpone the dialogue rather than the December 29 official government statements by PM Brown and the Foreign Secretary condemning the execution. Winnett said he doubted that the Chinese government could move quickly enough to cancel the human rights dialogue three hours after the statement by PM Brown. Little Sympathy for Shaikh; Concern for UK Standing -------------- -------------- ¶5. (C) British domestic pressure to respond to the execution of a British national by China has not been strong, Winnett said, and the UK government was searching for an appropriate response to the execution. PM Brown requested "options" for actions to take in response to the execution and these would be discussed at a meeting between the PM and the Foreign Secretary early in the week of January 4. The UK was also analyzing the Chinese reaction to the British statements after the execution in comparison to the diplomatic dispute that developed in 2008 with France over the visit by the Dalai Lama and in 2009 with Australia, following Rebiya BEIJING 00000005 002 OF 002 Kadeer's visit. Additional Notes Related to Shaikh's Case -------------- ¶6. (C) Winnett reported that the UK Embassy in Beijing was frustrated with a number of other aspects of the handling of Shaikh's death penalty case. The UK Embassy never received written or other notification from the Supreme People's Court (SPC),that the SPC had concluded its final review of the case, despite repeated attempts by the Embassy to contact the SPC. The Chinese had also asserted that there had been no "documentary proof" that Shaikh was mentally ill when the UK had flown a psychiatrist to Urumqi to examine Shaikh, Winnett said. However, the doctor was refused access to Shaikh by the Chinese and his diagnostic questions were only conveyed to Shaikh through a third-party. Even based on this indirect information, the psychiatrist concluded that Shaikh was mentally ill. However, none of this information was taken into account during the trial. Winnett noted that following the execution, the UK Embassy was notified that, in response to requests by the British consular section, Shaikh had been buried in the Uighur Public Cemetery in Urumqi, in accordance with Muslim burial traditions and with only Muslims present at the burial, a concern of Shaikh's family. GOLDBERG