Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act

President Trump Signs Law Punishing Chinese Officials Who Restrict Access to Tibet

By Edward Wong

A security camera monitored visitors to the Potala Palace in Lhasa, the capital of the Tibet colony. The Chinese government puts tight restrictions on travel to Tibetan areas, where discontent with Beijing’s rule is widespread.

WASHINGTON — President Trump has enacted a law that requires the State Department to punish Chinese officials who bar American officials, journalists and other citizens from going freely to Tibetan areas in China’s far west.
By some measures, those areas, though sparsely populated, make up one-quarter of China’s territory, and they have been the site of protests and riots against Chinese rule for decades. 

Because of the delicate political situation, the Tibetan plateau has long been under careful watch by central and local security officials.
Chinese security agencies make it difficult for foreigners to travel in most of the areas, and those restrictions have gotten tougher since widespread protests took place in 2012.
The government and the ruling Communist Party ban foreign diplomats and journalists from going to central Tibet, called the Tibet Autonomous Region, without getting official permission and going on carefully organized propaganda tours. 

It has been eight years since The New York Times was allowed to go on one of those trips, which are run by the Foreign Ministry.
Ordinary foreign tourists who want to visit central Tibet, which includes the capital city of Lhasa, must join a tour group, often with people of the same nationality.

The new American law cites Larung Gar, a sprawling Buddhist institution in Sichuan Province, as a site that Chinese officials have kept foreigners from seeing. The homes of many monks and nuns there have been demolished in recent years.

The new American law, enacted on Wednesday and called the Reciprocal Access to Tibet Act, says the secretary of state, who is now Mike Pompeo, must within 90 days give Congress a report that lays out the level of access to Tibetan areas that Chinese officials grant Americans.
The secretary is then supposed to determine which Chinese officials are responsible for placing limits on foreigners traveling to Tibet and bar them from getting visas to the United States or revoke any active visas they have. 

The secretary must make this assessment annually for five years.
The goal of the law is to force Chinese officials to relent on the limits they impose on travel to Tibetan areas.
“For too long, China has covered up their human rights violations in Tibet by restricting travel,” Representative Jim McGovern, Democrat of Massachusetts, said in a written statement. 

“But actions have consequences, and today, we are one step closer to holding the Chinese officials who implement these restrictions accountable.”
Matteo Mecacci, president of the International Campaign for Tibet, an advocacy group based in Washington, said President Trump’s enactment of the law “has blazed a path for other countries to follow.”
China is unlikely to change its travel limits, despite the law.
The Trump administration has taken steps against China on a wide range of issues, most notably trade. 

On Thursday, the Justice Department indicted two Chinese men on charges of hacking corporate networks and downloading troves of business data.

Buddhist nuns at Larung Gar in 2016. Tibetans across the plateau are concerned about the dilution of their culture.

American officials recently lured a Chinese man accused of being a spy to Belgium and had him arrested there. 

The United States has also had Canada arrest a top executive of Huawei, the giant technology company, as she was passing through Vancouver. 

The United States is seeking her extradition on charges that she tricked banks into conducting transactions that violated United States sanctions on Iran.
The bipartisan support for the Tibet legislation and its easy passage into law reflect the willingness of American officials to take a hard stand against China. 

The new law cites Larung Gar, an enormous Buddhist institution in Sichuan Province, as an example of a Tibetan area that Chinese officials have kept foreigners from seeing in recent years. 

That is because officials have been demolishing the homes of many monks and nuns there.
Across the plateau, Tibetans are anxious about the dilution of their culture, an issue that the Dalai Lama, the spiritual leader living in exile, has raised repeatedly, calling it “cultural genocide.”
This year, a Chinese court sentenced Tashi Wangchuk, an advocate of Tibetan language education, to five years in prison, despite widespread international criticism of his arrest. 

He had appeared in a Times video talking about the need for more teaching of Tibetan in schools, and he was arrested even though he has said he does not advocate for an independent Tibet.
Since 2009, at least 155 Tibetans have self-immolated in acts of protest against Chinese rule.

Cultural Genocide

Tibet activist jailed in China over language campaign
BBC News

A volunteer holds placards of detained Taiwanese activist Lee Ming-cheh (L) and Tibetan education advocate Tashi Wangchuk (R)

A Tibetan activist has been jailed for five years in China for "inciting separatism," after he spoke to the New York Times about efforts to preserve his native language.
Tashi Wangchuk was arrested in 2016, after featuring in a video by the newspaper.
In the interview, he spoke of his fear that Tibetan culture was being destroyed in China.
Amnesty International denounced the verdict as "beyond absurd".
Tashi, who pleaded not guilty to the charges, will be due for release in 2021.
His lawyer told the AFP news agency that he planned to appeal the decision.
"I believe he committed no crime and we do not accept the verdict," Liang Xiojun told AFP.
Tashi appeared in a New York Times documentary in late 2015, where he voiced concerns that Tibetan culture was being destroyed in China.
He attempted to file a lawsuit in Beijing against local officials in his hometown, Yushu, saying they were sidelining the Tibetan language in favour of Mandarin in schools.
Mr Liang told reporters at Tashi's trial earlier this year that the video was used as a key piece of evidence by the prosecution.
"He doesn't believe he's incited separatism," Mr Liang said. 

"He only wants to strengthen Tibetan language education."
Joshua Rosenzweig, East Asia research director at Amnesty International called the verdict a "gross injustice".
"He is being cruelly punished... To brand peaceful activism for [the] Tibetan language as 'inciting separatism' is beyond absurd," he said in a statement.
Tibet, a remote and mainly Buddhist territory known as the "roof of the world", is governed as an "autonomous" region of China.
Rights groups say China continues to violate human rights, accusing Beijing of political and religious repression.

Cultural Genocide

How China Used a Times Documentary as Evidence Against Its Subject
By JONAH M. KESSEL

Last week, Tibetan activist Tashi Wangchuk was tried in Yushu Tibetan Autonomous Prefecture, Qinghai on charges of “inciting separatism” after he appeared in a New York Times video about his fight to preserve the Tibetan language, which faces extinction due both to government efforts to enforce Mandarin learning and to economic pressures to learn the national tongue. No verdict has yet been announced, but the charges against him could bring a sentence of up to 15 years. CDT cartoonist Badiucao pays tribute to Tashi by depicting a snow lion, the traditional emblem of Tibet, with a muzzle over its mouth

During the eight years I lived in China, people would often say they felt as if they had no voice under Communist Party rule. 

This was especially true for minorities.
So when Tashi Wangchuk, a Tibetan herder turned shopkeeper, showed up at my apartment in Beijing in the spring of 2015, I of course wanted to listen to his story.
He told me the Chinese authorities on the Tibetan Plateau had been slowly eradicating the Tibetan language from schools and the business world. 

Mr. Tashi believed prohibiting the study of the Tibetan language went against China’s constitution.
The New York Times was not Mr. Tashi’s first stop in his attempt to raise this issue, I learned. 

Chinese state-controlled media had refused to listen to him. 

And years earlier, the Chinese authorities had briefly jailed him for expressing his opinions on social media. 

Foreign media were his last resort to be heard.
Last week, more than two years after our first meeting, Mr. Tashi was tried in court for “inciting separatism,” a criminal charge that largely amounts to seeking independence from the Chinese state. No verdict has come down yet, but the sentence could hold a punishment of 15 years in prison. (For those hoping for an acquittal, it’s important to note that China’s courts have a 99 percent conviction rate.)
But the root of his crime was talking to me.
In 2015, after I met Mr. Tashi, I made a nine-minute film for The Times about his efforts to raise the issue of Tibetan education to the central government and Chinese state media. 

Last week, that documentary was shown in court as the main evidence that Mr. Tashi was inciting separatism.
The use of my film as evidence against Mr. Tashi gets at the heart of one of the thorniest issues that can plague foreign journalists: How do we justify instances when our work — aimed at giving voice to the voiceless and holding the powerful to account — ends up putting its subjects at risk or in danger?

Protesters gathered outside the Chinese Embassy in London on the first anniversary of Mr. Tashi’s detention.

Before I made this documentary, Edward Wong — then The Times’s Beijing bureau chief — and I talked at length with Mr. Tashi about the risks he assumed in speaking with us and appearing on video.
Mr. Tashi thought that people wouldn’t believe his story if they couldn’t see him. 

I agreed that it wouldn’t hold the same power. 

He believed he was acting within the guidelines of the law. 

I believed in giving him the agency the Chinese government and state media had refused him. 

He believed his voice must be heard at all costs.
But for Mr. Tashi, speaking out has come at a price.
In early 2016, Mr. Tashi — who specifically told me that he was not advocating Tibetan independence — was kidnapped and held in secret detention, without contact with lawyers and family members for months on end. 

He was subjected to constant interrogation. 

For two years, he has waited in jail, silenced.
But along with his struggles came renewed hope in a story long plagued by news fatigue: The international community began speaking up for Mr. Tashi and his cause.
United Nations officials, Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, PEN America and the United States Embassy in Beijing have all publicly criticized the Chinese government over the case. 

Last March, the European Union and Germany voiced concerns at the United Nations Human Rights Council over Mr. Tashi’s arrest. 

His case has been covered by countless publications around the world, and his arrest has transformed him from an ordinary shopkeeper with a fifth-grade education into a cultural icon of both justice and oppression.

Protesters gathered in support of Mr. Tashi outside the Chinese consulate in New York on Monday.

One of Mr. Tashi’s lawyers told us that community members in Yushu, his hometown, had said that Mr. Tashi had “made a big impact on local Tibetans” and that “people admire him.”
The International Tibet Network awarded him the Tenzin Delek Rinpoche Medal of Courage, recognizing his “courage and dedication to promoting Tibetan human rights and justice for the Tibetan people.”
Meanwhile, some have asked me if I regret making my film. 

I’ve fielded a variety of queries on the topic — from Tibetan advocacy groups, journalists, students, press freedom groups and social media. 

Some have been critical, saying I shouldn’t have made the documentary. 

A former State Department official raised the question of whether I am “complicit in exposing a person vulnerable for his ethnicity.”
I’ve struggled with some of these issues on my own. 

I’ve wondered: Is our discussion of Tibetan rights worth more than a decade of one man’s freedom? Has Mr. Tashi’s arrest ultimately furthered his cause?

Protesters from @SFTHQ demanding the release of #TashiWangchuk are outside of the Chinese consulate in New York City

These are important and difficult questions. 

And while I don’t have definite answers, I do know this: Mr. Tashi and his concerns are now being acknowledged throughout the world. 

On Monday, protesters gathered outside the Chinese consulate in New York City to demand language rights for all Chinese — as well as the release of Mr. Tashi. 

Similar gatherings have happened in London. 

A political cartoonist in Australia has turned his message into pop art. 

His voice, at last, is resonating on an international stage.
I know, too, that Mr. Tashi has asked these kinds of questions himself and that he came to his own conclusions: that language rights are human rights, that they are protected by both China’s constitution and international human rights law, and that it was his duty to help protect his culture, no matter the cost.

Chinese Colonialism

Rights Groups Condemn China for Charging Tibetan Activist with 'Inciting Separatism'
By Yeshi Dorje

A Tibetan exile in Dharmsala, India, walks past a banner demanding the release of Tashi Wangchuk, an outspoken campaigner for the rights of Tibetans to receive instructions in Tibetan language, who was arrested in 2016 in China's Qinghai province for allegedly inciting separatism, Jan. 27, 2017.

A Tibetan language rights advocate and businessman pleaded not guilty Thursday to four charges of "inciting separatism" during a four-hour trial in China that a rights group called a "sham."
The People's Middle Court in Yushu, in Qinghai province, said it would issue a verdict at a later, unspecified date, according to a tweet in Chinese from activist Tashi Wangchuk's lawyer.
Tashi Wangchuk, 32, has been in detention since his arrest in January 2016, two months after he spoke to New York Times reporters about how China's policy was eroding the Tibetan language.
The primary evidence in the trial was a short video documentary by the Times titled A Tibetan's Journey for Justice, according to Liang Xiaojun, the defendant's attorney. 

The Times is blocked in China, and the case underscores the danger people place themselves in when speaking with foreign news outlets.
Human Rights Watch said the delay in the verdict was an indication that a severe sentence, which could be up to 15 years in prison, would be an embarrassment for Chinese government authorities.
"The fact that he hasn't been given a sentence at all may mean that the authorities essentially going to keep him in detention but spare themselves the embarrassment of giving him a harsh sentence," said Sophie Richardson, China director at Human Rights Watch. 

"That he has not been given a verdict doesn't mean that he is going to go free."
Amnesty International called the trial a "sham" that presented "absurd" charges against the activist.

Misuse of charge alleged
The group's statement said, "Exposing and criticizing the way Tibetan language and culture are being suppressed by government policies is a legitimate exercise of free speech. Labeling it as a form of 'inciting separatism' demonstrates how the Chinese authorities blatantly misuse this criminal charge to silence dissent."
A Tibetan exile in Dharmsala, India, stands near a poster demanding that China release Tibetan activist Tashi Wangchuk, who was charged with inciting separatism, Jan. 27, 2017.

Beijing considers Tibet "part" of China and often equates Tibetans' advocacy for greater autonomy or rights of a cultural or religious nature as "separatism." 

VOA Tibetan sought a comment on the case from the Chinese Embassy in Washington, but was told, "You cannot leave a message because message box is full."
In the documentary, Tashi Wangchuk speaks extensively in Mandarin about the "pressure and fear" felt by Tibetans and his worry that their culture is being wiped out through the steady erosion of their language, according to The Associated Press.
Minority rights are protected under China's constitution, as is the right to sue government officials, he says in the video.
Tashi Wangchuk notes that 140 Tibetans have died from self-immolation since 2009 and says he believes they were also protesting the disappearance of their culture under Beijing's rule.
The documentary shows him seeking redress through official channels as he travels to Beijing, where he tries, unsuccessfully, to sue local officials and persuade journalists at China's powerful state broadcaster, CCTV, to cover his case.
Tashi Wangchuk said that if the courts refused to hear his case, it would prove that the Chinese legal system would not solve issues surrounding Tibetan rights. 

"If this comes to an end and I'm locked up and cannot proceed with what I'm doing and they force me to say or do things I don't want to say, I will choose suicide," he added.
Liang said in his tweet that although most people in the courtroom were Tibetans, the court conducted the trial in Chinese.
"I said that I am an outsider from the point of view of the Tibetans, but that I and many others who love Tibetan culture wish that it will be protected just as the Chinese traditional culture will be protected," Liang said. 

"I said, 'I wish you can understand the altruistic motivation of this young, admirable Tibetan.'"

Reflection of commitment to rights
How the Chinese court handles this case will define China's commitment to upholding the constitutional rights of its citizens, said Lobsang Sangay, head of Tibet's government in exile.

Two Tibetan nuns in Dharmsala, India, hold placards demanding that China release Tashi Wangchuk, an outspoken campaigner for the rights of Tibetans, Jan. 27, 2017.

"Tashi Wangchuk has on his own volition advocated for a constitutionally guaranteed right, that of bilingual education for Tibetans and ethnic minorities. His trial and sentencing will determine largely whether the Chinese government is committed to upholding the internationally recognized laws and domestically accepted rule of law in China," Sangay said in a statement released by the exiled Tibetan government.
The South China Morning Post quoted Liang as saying that Tashi Wangchuk was treated well by other inmates in the detention.
"He is innocent because he was only exercising his right to criticize the marginalization of Tibetan language and culture," Liang said. 

"He is well-treated [in Tibetans' detention facilities] because what he does is well-respected among Tibetans."
"This case has been farce from the beginning," said Richardson, speaking to the VOA's Tibetan service. 

"The only way for China to redeem itself from embarrassing itself is to let him go immediately, drop the charges and let the man go back to living his life, and, frankly, fulfilling precisely the requests he made to them to allow that kind of education. That's what the Chinese law allows for."

Criminal Nation

After a Famed Prisoner Dies in China, Taiwan Fears for Another
By CHRIS HORTON

Pictures of Lee Ming-cheh, left, a rights advocate from Taiwan, and Tashi Wangchuk, an education advocate from Tibet, during a commemoration last month in Taiwan of the 1989 pro-democracy crackdown in China. Both men are in Chinese custody. 

TAIPEI, Taiwan — For many in Taiwan, the death in custody last week of the Chinese Nobel Peace laureate Liu Xiaobo had double relevance.
It was a reminder of how much Taiwan — but not China — has changed politically since the late 1980s, when both were one-party, authoritarian states.
On Saturday, Taiwan, now a full-fledged democracy, celebrated the 30th anniversary of the end of four decades of martial law. 

On Tuesday, at the opening of the first Asian bureau of Reporters Without Borders, an organization that advocates press freedom, Wu’er Kaixi, a leader of the 1989 pro-democracy demonstrations in Beijing, dedicated a moment of silence to Mr. Liu, while praising Taiwan’s progress.
But the death of Mr. Liu, who was serving an 11-year prison sentence for his role in Charter 08, a manifesto for peaceful political change, also deepened concerns over the fate of Lee Ming-cheh, a human rights advocate from Taiwan who went missing after his arrival in the southern Chinese province of Guangdong in March.
More than a week passed before Chinese officials announced that Mr. Lee had been detained. 

In April, Mr. Lee’s wife, Lee Ching-yu, was blocked from entering China, where she said she hoped to take him his blood-pressure medication. 

In late May, Mr. Lee was officially arrested on a charge of “subverting state power.”

It has not been lost on Mr. Lee’s family and friends, or the news media in Taiwan, that the charge he faces is similar to the one brought against Mr. Liu, of “inciting subversion of state power.”

Hours after Mr. Liu’s death, Taiwan’s state-owned Central News Agency reported that the governing Democratic Progressive Party had issued a statement calling on China to release Mr. Liu’s widow, Liu Xia, who was placed under house arrest in 2010, as well as Mr. Lee.
Comparing the plights of Mr. Liu and Mr. Lee, a commentary this month in a Taiwan newspaper, Liberty Times, asked: “Will Lee Ming-cheh be the next Liu Xiaobo?”
“What’s similar is that Lee Ming-cheh and Liu Xiaobo were both arrested for the crime of ‘subversion of state power,’” it said. 

“What’s different is that Liu Xiaobo is Chinese, whereas Lee Ming-cheh is Taiwanese. After Lee Ming-cheh entered prison, will he ‘get sick’ or be forcefully ‘sickened’? This deserves attention.”
Nongovernmental organization workers from Taiwan who travel to China should remain on a high state of alert, the commentary added. 

“You absolutely do not want to become the next Lee Ming-cheh,” it said.
In a letter to The Washington Post published on Sunday, Stanley Kao, Taiwan’s envoy to the United States, also connected the cases.
“Mr. Liu’s lifelong beliefs are the core values we live by in Taiwan, namely an abiding respect for human rights and due process of law,” Mr. Kao wrote, adding that China should immediately release Mr. Lee.
Beijing severed official communication channels with Taiwan in the fall after it became apparent that President Tsai Ing-wen, who took office in May last year, would not bow to Chinese pressure to endorse the “1992 consensus,” which holds that China and Taiwan agree there is “one China” — with each side reserving its own interpretation of what that means. 

Beijing has insisted that self-ruled Taiwan is part of its territory, and it has not renounced the use of force to achieve unification.
That has left the Tsai administration with limited tools to press Beijing for information about Mr. Lee. Ms. Tsai — one of the first government leaders to issue a statement mourning Mr. Liu’s death — has taken to her Twitter account to call for Mr. Lee’s release.
If history is any guide, progress on Mr. Lee’s case is unlikely in the coming weeks. 

The Chinese Communist Party is preparing for its 19th Party Congress this fall, a meeting that will determine the leadership lineup under Xi Jinping for the next five years and influence the succession beyond that. 

In the jockeying for power, concessions to Taiwan could be interpreted as a sign of weakness.
Eeling Chiu, secretary general of the Taiwan Association for Human Rights, has supported Ms. Lee’s efforts to rally international pressure on China to free her husband. 

Ms. Chiu said that there had been no information about Mr. Lee’s situation aside from occasional statements from Beijing, such as the announcement last month that a lawyer had been appointed to represent him.
“We haven’t heard anything new since they announced they’d appointed him a lawyer,” she said in an interview, dismissing the gesture as “fake.” 

“We don’t even know who the lawyer is. If you’re trying to provide for the rights of someone involved in legal proceedings, getting in touch with their family is one of the most basic things you should do.”
The Tsai administration says it will continue to work on Mr. Lee’s behalf. 

“The government is doing everything it can to secure Mr. Lee’s release as soon as possible,” Alex Huang, the spokesman for the presidential office, said on Tuesday.

China's War on Law: Five Names to Listen for at the EU-China Summit

EU Should Call for Release of Activists Unjustly Imprisoned
By Lotte Leicht

Federica Mogherini (L), High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs, and China's State Councilor Yang Jiechi attend a joint news conference at Diaoyutai State Guesthouse in Beijing, China April 19, 2017. 

Torture, wrongful imprisonment, restrictions on everything from peaceful expression, to religious practice, to the number of children you can have: these are some of the most persistent human rights abuses in China today. 

Under the dictator Xi Jinping, whose senior officials arrive in Brussels this week for the European Union-China Summit, courageous human rights defenders, lawyers and academics in China have sustained an extraordinary body blow.
The Chinese government’s treatment of five people is emblematic of all that is wrong in China today:
Scholar and 2010 Nobel Peace Prize winner Liu Xiaobo is serving an 11-year sentence for “inciting subversion” in response to his calls for democratic reform.
Ethnic Uighur economist Ilham Tohti is serving a life sentence for having urged dialogue between different ethnic groups, particularly in the predominantly Muslim area of Xinjiang.
Tibetan language rights advocate Tashi Wangchuk awaits trial for telling his story to the New York Times.
Lawyer Wang Quanzhang, detained since July 2015, is facing subversion charges for his work defending in court members of religious minorities.
Women’s rights activist Su Changlan was convicted on subversion charges in retaliation for her work defending victims of domestic violence.
The EU has pledged to “throw its full weight behind advocates of liberty, democracy and human rights” and to “raise human rights issues” including “at the highest level.” 

If that’s the case, the summit is an ideal opportunity for the EU’s highest officials to explicitly call for these people’s release. 

After all, the EU’s human rights pledges will only be meaningful if applied in real situations, with determination and conviction.
The EU has acknowledged that human rights improvements in China are key to the future of their bilateral relationship, and calling for the freedom of those unjustly imprisoned is an obvious place to start. 

That the summit falls just ahead of the anniversary of the 1989 Tiananmen Massacre – an event that galvanized China’s contemporary human rights community – places a responsibility on EU leaders to call for accountability from Beijing. 

The EU should demonstrate the strength and solidarity that won it the 2012 Nobel Peace Prize by insisting on the release of the 2010 winner – and all others unjustly imprisoned by Beijing.

Human Rights Day: US and EU call on China to release political prisoners

‘I remain extremely concerned about the ongoing detention of Chinese lawyers,’ the US ambassador to China says

By Benjamin Haas in Hong Kong

More than half a dozen political prisoners in China should freed, the United States and European Union have said, citing a deteriorating human rights situation that has seen hundreds lawyers and activists detained in the past year.
Since coming to power in 2012, Xi Jinping has presided over a wide-ranging crackdown on freedom of expression, rights lawyers, feminists, activists and religion. 

About 250 lawyers and activists were detained by police starting in July last year in what some have called a “war on law”.
“I remain extremely concerned about the ongoing detention of Chinese lawyers,” Max Baucus, the US ambassador to China, said in a statement. 

“China’s treatment of these lawyers and advocates calls into question its commitment to the rule of law.”
Crusading attorneys Li Heping, Wang Quanzhang, Xie Yang and Xie Yanyi all remain remain behind bars, and Baucus singled out their cases and called for their release. 

The EU echoed many of the same sentiments and highlighted the same jailed lawyers.
“We urge China to immediately release any individual who has been detained … for seeking to exercise, protect or promote their own rights or the rights of others,” the EU statement said.
The US and EU made the calls to mark Human Rights Day, a United Nations holiday commemorating the adoption of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which China signed.
“During the past year, we have been extremely troubled about the deterioration of the situation with respect to freedom of expression and association,” the EU statement said.
“We are equally concerned about all human rights defenders and their family members who have been harassed and punished because of their work in promoting rights which are protected in China’s Constitution and international law.”
Both the US and EU called for Nobel Peace prize laureate and democracy activist Liu Xiaobo, who has been in prison since 2008, to be freed.
Tashi Wangchuk, a jailed Tibetan language advocate, was also mentioned by both governments. 

His case is emblematic of the hardline stance China has taken towards ethnic minorities who do not toe the Communist party line. 

Another victim of those policies is Ilham Tohti, a Muslim Uighur academic sentenced to life in prison, who the EU said should be released.
“I can tell you that China’s approach to human rights directly impacts our overall bilateral relationship,” Baucus said. 

“While other countries celebrate when their citizens win the Nobel Peace prize, Chinese Peace prize winner Liu Xiaobo remains jailed.”
The strongly-worded statement on human rights from the US may be its last for a while, Chinese activists worry. 

They fear president-elect Donald Trump will pull back from defending right around the world.
Curiously absent from the EU statement was Gui Minhai, a Swedish national and publisher of books critical of China’s leaders, who was abducted from Thailand a year ago. 

He later appeared in China, giving a televised “confession”.
More than 120 authors also took the opportunity of Human Rights Day to call on Xi to his end his government’s fierce crackdown on writers and dissidents, with the authors saying they “cannot stand by as more and more of our friends and colleagues are silenced”.