asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he or his Department have made representations to the Chinese Government to protest about the manner in which student protestors were treated in that country in the past month.
39.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Representations to China.
38.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the precise content of the protest, if any, communicated to the People's Republic of China, in view of the recent events in that country which has included executions and suppression of protests in a brutal fashion.
17.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the protest, if any, the Government have made to the Chinese authorities regarding the recent killings of civilians in Beijing by Chinese security forces; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
28.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs the protest which has been made to the Chinese Government about the brutal suppression of the demonstrations for the creation of a democracy in that country; and the reply; if any, which has been received.
30.
asked the Minister for Foreign Affairs if he will outline the steps the Government have taken to date to express the horror of the Irish people at the appalling atrocities which took place in Beijing and other parts of China.
I propose to take Questions Nos. 38, 39, 17, 28 and 30 together.
The events which took place in Beijing and elsewhere in the People's Republic of China in early June have been a source of profound shock to the Government. With our partners in the Twelve we have placed on record our revulsion at these events and have taken a number of steps designed to convey our concern to the Chinese authorities.
Immediately the scale of the events became known, the Twelve issued a statement in the strongest terms condemning the violent repression used against peaceful demonstrators. The Twelve advised the Chinese authorities that continued repressive actions in violation of universally recognised human rights principles would greatly prejudice China's international standing. The Twelve also decided to suspend high level contacts with China.
On 15 June the Presidency made a demarche on behalf of the Twelve to the Chinese Ambassador in Madrid to express concern about and call for an end to the wave of arrests and other acts of repression. On 17 June the Ambassadors of the Troika and a representative of the European Commission went to the Chinese Foreign Ministry to express the Twelve's disapproval of the imposition of death sentences on three workers in Shanghai.
The European Council at its meeting of 26 and 27 June strongly condemned the brutal repression taking place in China and expressed dismay at the executions which were taking place. It called on the Chinese authorities to stop the executions and to put an end to the repressive actions against those who claim their democratic rights.
To underline the gravity of the situation the Twelve agreed at the European Council to adopt a series of specific measures, including suspension of high level visits and postponement of new co-operation projects.
Copies of twelve statements on the recent events in China have been deposited in the Oireachtas Library. The Twelve's views on these developments have also been conveyed to the Chinese Embassy in Dublin.
At the meeting of European Community Foreign Ministers in Paris on 11 July it was decided to make a further approach to the Chinese authorities on the humanitarian aspects of recent developments in China and to pursue efforts to gain admission by independent observers to prisons and trials. This further demarche is now going ahead.
I thank the Minister for his reply. I agree with the actions the Twelve have taken. I think they have got the balance absolutely right in this regard. One does not want to have the Chinese create a wall around themselves so that they are impervious to outside influences. Has the Minister seen reports that Chinese ambassadors all over the world are being called back for discussions on, I presume, public reaction in different countries to the events in Beijing and other parts of China? To go back to a point I made an hour ago, the seriousness with which events are taken in different countries is conveyed by the level at which concern has been expressed to the ambassadors. I would urge the Minister, before the Chinese Ambassador leaves for that conference in Beijing, to personally see him. I had my party, and presumably the House, would want the Minister to convey to him our serious concern about the u-turn that has been done on the road to democracy in China and about the executions that have taken place. We would like the Minister to convey that to the Ambassador personally so that when he goes to Beijing he can say at this conference that he was seen by the highest political figure in the Department of Foreign Affairs and not by somebody lower down.
As I have already said, this country is participating fully in the measures agreed by the Twelve in their deliberations since early June and the Twelve's views have already been conveyed to the Chinese Embassy in Dublin. I take on board the point of view offered by Deputy Barry. I can see the reason for it and will give the matter every consideration.
My priority question asks specifically the content of the communication of the Department for Foreign Affairs to the People's Republic of China through their embassy. While I welcome and would like to act in co-operation with everything the Minister is doing. I am concerned that we have not been given the rough principles of a direct Irish communication which would be valuable, as Deputy Barry suggests. Is the Minister not concerned about the tone of the communications that have issued in response to the documents? I am talking about a statement issued in Dublin on 29 June 1989 and the one issued in Beijing on 17 July 1989 which more or less tells the international Community that if they express a concern they could be harming themselves in doing so. Does this not create certain tensions in the international environment of diplomatic relations? I support Deputy Barry's request that it would be valuable to make clear to the Ambassador our view on this, that they cannot have it both ways.
I thank Deputy Higgins for his contribution by way of supplementary questions. I agree with Deputy Barry that we have to be very careful as to how we handle this. With regard to the suggestion that I should see the Ambassador, I will take that suggestion on board and I will give it serious consideration.
There are two remaining Priority Questions and I would very much like co-operation in disposing of them. Question No. 40 is next.