Providing Human Rights? : An Analysis
on Donor’s Influence on China’s

Human Rights observance

WANG Minzhao
51-148239

Framework• Introduction: research design; literature
review; main hypothesis• China’s Human rights in Change• Japan’s ODA and its influence in HR• EU’s ODA and its influence in HR• Conclusion and implication

Part I: Research design• Research question: To what extend and in what ways will foreign
aid have effect on recipient government’s observance of humanrights?
 Independent variable: foreign aid (gate-keeping stage, levelstage, the type of ODA, conditions attached) Dependent variable: human rights (official statements andscholarly works, international treaties, domestic policy-making) Controlled variables: governmental administration; domestic
institutional condition; domestic economic development• Case study: advantage and limitation (its applicability?)

Part I: Conventional thinking• Foreign aid
 Determinants: donor interests (colonial past, political alliances,strategic consideration) > recipient needs

 Effects: limited influence on economic growth,democratization, good governance• Human rights
 Domestic: domestic institutional condition, governmental
administration, domestic economic development
 International: (UN 1000 A/55/342) wealth generation,institutionalization

Part I: Main hypothesis
PathwayHypothesis

Wealthgeneration

1. Foreign aid as a promoter for recipient
countries’ economic prosperity;

Institutionaliza 2. Cutting off aid (sanction/ embargo) may
tion
force recipients to change its human rights
policy;3. Conditional foreign aid may serve a betterrole;
4. Certain types of foreign aid may promote
institutionalization ;5. Foreign aid may work through changing
the cognitively available choices on issues
related to human rights.

Part II: China’s human rights in change
Official statements
and scholarly works

HR treaties adopted by
China

HR policy-making

Prior to 1978: ideological weapon by capitalist nations to attack socialist system.

19781989

nuancedSigned 7 international
treaties

The rights of personal
freedom and freedom of
religious belief werewritten into constitution.

19891994

Emphasis on therelationship between
international humanrights norms and statesovereignty

Still engaged in limitedinternational HR activities

Chinese government sentdelegations to westerncountries to study HRtheories

1995-Admit some of thecommon standards forHR

1997: ICSECR (ratified inInternational dialogue and2001)
cooperation
1998: ICCPR (waiting to beratified)1989~1995• International pressure: criticism from nations and NGOs,
resolutions in UN, joint-embargo (cutting off foreign aid)
• China’s reaction:
 Jiang Zemin and Li Peng on several occasions asked China’s
scholars to develop China’s own theories of human rights.
 Publication of a White Paper in October 1991: historical andsocial background, right to subsistence, independence andsovereignty, national stability

 No concession until western countries gave in: “Provided
Bush made the first step to improve relations, he wouldfind China ready to reciprocate.” (Deng, 1989)

White Paper as a reaction•The issue of human rights has become one of great significance and common concern inthe world community. The series of declarations and conventions adopted by the United
Nations have won the support and respect of many countries. The Chinese government
has also highly appraised the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, considering it the firstinternational human rights document that has laid the foundation for the practice ofhuman rights in the world arena. However, the evolution of the situation in regard tohuman rights is circumscribed by the historical, social, economic and cultural conditions ofvarious nations, and involves a process of historical development…Therefore, a country‘s
human rights situation should not be judged in total disregard of its history and national
conditions, nor can it be evaluated according to a preconceived model or the conditions ofanother country or region. Such is the practical attitude, the attitude of seeking truth fromfacts.

•The first thing for the Chinese people to do is, for historical reasons, to secure the right tosubsistence.

•The preservation of national independence and state sovereignty and the freedom fromimperialist subjugation are, therefore, the very fundamental conditions for the survival anddevelopment of the Chinese people.

•It is the fundamental wish and demand of the Chinese people and a long-term, urgent taskof the Chinese government to maintain national stability.

----” Human Rights in China” (White Paper), November 1991, Beijing

Part III: Japan as the donor• Basic information: started in 1979; the biggest donor in China until theearly 2000s; an important funding source at the beginning of reform andopening-up (supported by memoirs)• Reaction after 1989
 Suspended the third loan aid negotiation in 1989 reluctantly (1 million yen inemergency on 7 August; former aid projects were reopened in 18th August
1989; 80% of Japanese firms in China were in full operation in mid-August;fully normalized in Jan 1990)
 A change in ODA principles: new guidelines in 1991; Four principles in Japan’s
ODA Charter in 1992---- but not applied to China’s human rights performance Non-conditional aid An increase of technical cooperation in Japan’s ODA to China

Types of Japan’s ODA to China
Milion dollar“Japan’s ODA Annual Report” (named “Japan’s ODA White Paper” since 2001) every year

Part IV: EU as the donor• Basic information: started in 1983 (aid provided by member

countries started in the late 1970s); the second biggest donor inChina• Reaction after 1989:
 Gate-keeping stage: a joint sanctions against Beijing includingcutting down its aid to China on 27 June 1989; co-sponsored
draft resolutions against Beijing in United Nations Commission
on Human Rights from 1989 to 1997 (August 1989) ---- Failed
 level stage: a bilateral human rights dialogue accompanied withthe restart of foreign aid since 1995 ---- limited directachievements
 Aid projects related to human rights: “EU–China Legal andJudicial Co-operation Programme”, China–EU Law School inBeijing ---- long-term positive impact

Objective of EU’s dialogue withChina• The European Union is committed to dealing with those priority
issues which should be included on the agenda for every [humanrights] dialogue. These include the signing, ratification andimplementation of international human rights instruments, cooperation with international human rights procedures andmechanisms, combating the death penalty, combating torture,
combating all forms of discrimination, children’s rights, and inparticular those of children in armed conflicts, women’s rights,
freedom of expression, the role of civil society and theprotection of human rights defenders, international cooperation in the field of justice, in particular with theInternational Criminal Court, promotion of the processes ofdemocratization and good governance, the rule of law and theprevention of conflict.
—— EU Guidelines on Human Rights Dialogues with ThirdCountries: Update, p. 6

Part V: Conclusion andimplication
Japan - China

EU - China

Wealthgeneration

economic
prosperity

The importance ofJapan’s ODA at thebeginning of reform

Not significant

institutionali
zationGatekeeping

Not tested

FailedConditions

Not tested

Not tested

Types

Technical cooperation

Projects promoting
human rights

Cognitively
availablechoices

Showing the advantageof globalization

Scholarly works underthe influence of aidproject• Conclusion
 For an authoritarian recipient state with relative big domestic market,
donors can hardly have direct influence on its human rights behavior
simply by cutting down or putting conditions on aid. However, foreign aid
may work by changing the cognitively available choices of recipient
countries, and further promote the advantages of existed HR norms.

 A representative part of globalization: “I am honored to be a world
citizen while being a member of Chinese people ” (Deng)• Policy implications for donor countries: The importance to show their attitudes regarding human rights throughODA negotiation
 Detailed projects that will not harm recipients’ “sovereignty” arepreferredThank you forlistening