Criticism with a smile - Cameron tells China to be more responsible at home and abroad

Key extracts from David Cameron's speech in "China's Chicago", Chongqing (update: now it's on WebCameron). The theme of it is essentially Jesus'/Churchill's/Spiderman's uncle's dictum that "with great power comes great responsibility". He buttered them up with compliments but didn't shy away from calling on China to stop its aid to Zimbabwe, to do its bit on the environment, and to work towards greater political freedom domestically...

We must recognise the connection between wealth and fairness: "If we want to continue to lift billions of people in our world out of poverty…if we want to continue to spread opportunity ever more widely…and if we want to continue to transform and modernise societies…then we must continue to expand the economic freedom on which economic growth and the creation of wealth depends. Yes to free trade. No to protection. Being clear that globalisation is good for Britain, China and the world."

Wealth can bring inequality and anxiety: "When I worked in Hong Kong briefly as a student in 1985, Shenzhen was barely more than a small town, surrounded by paddy fields and waterways. Today, Shenzhen is a city with a population larger than London. It makes most of the world’s iPods - and one in ten of the world’s mobile phones. But these changes – the product of economic freedom – can bring social unease. We see greater inequality – here and in the West. We see greater anxiety as jobs are lost as well as created – here and in the West."

China is starting to accept the case for tackling climate change (no mention of action): "Some argue climate change isn’t happening. Fortunately, the weight of scientific evidence is steadily destroying their credibility. More worrying, others argue we shouldn’t bother to act, because nothing we do will make a real difference. "China’s building two coal-fired power stations every week", they say. "Why should we act if they won’t? These people have got China wrong... There is growing awareness across China of the fragility of your environment."

As leaders of the industrial revolution we will take more responsibility for the green one: "I can announce that developing green coal will be a priority for a Conservative Government: we will do what it takes to make Britain a world leader in this crucial field. All existing coal-fired power stations should be retro-fitted with CCS, and all future coal-fired power stations should be built with CCS. If we don’t do this, we will not meet our carbon emissions targets. Of course, today the technology is not yet fully in place. But that is not a case for inaction now."

Striking a bargain: "We need something in return – the second vital aspect of environmental accountability. We need China to make its data – about emissions, about efficiency, about imported timber - more transparent. We will not tackle climate change unless we have accurate information – to judge performance, to trade carbon, and to make a post-Kyoto international climate change agreement work.

China has an interest in ending killings in Darfur (not selling Sudan helicopters would be a start): "Great powers have a bigger interest than anyone in preserving stability. As your star rises once more in the world, so does the size of your stake in preserving global security and stability. This is partly a question of self-interest. Today, you are the world’s third biggest importer of oil, and ten per cent of it comes from Sudan. So China has a direct national interest in working for stability in Sudan, and an end to the killings in Darfur."

Stop giving aid to Mugabe: "You have an interest too in making sure Zimbabwe has a sustainable and brighter future. Be in no doubt about what Robert Mugabe has done to that country. It used to be the breadbasket of Africa. Now, it is starving. Zimbabweans are poorer than they were in 1970. It shouldn’t be like this. I commend the fact that China has cut back on its aid to Zimbabwe. I would urge you to go further and end your direct aid for the Government of Zimbabwe altogether."

China should be more responsible in its foreign policy: "It is in your interests, and the world’s interests, to do more. To continue to bring more pressure to bear on North Korea and Burma, because the stability and prosperity of your country depends on the stability and prosperity of your neighbours. To help resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis, because the proliferation of nuclear materiel endangers lives in Nanjing as much as it does in New York. And help deliver and reward good governance in Africa, because your investment in that continent depends on stability and progress."

You have economic freedom, now it's time for political freedom: "Let me make clear my hope that in the years to come, your economic opening will lead to a greater political opening too. Because it is no secret that we have differences of opinion about human rights. There are deep concerns about freedom of expression, of religion, about the extensive use of the death penalty, about the degree to which the media – and access for example to the internet – are curtailed. We make these arguments not because we think we are the moral majority…that somehow we think we have a monopoly on civilised principles…but instead, because our experience has taught us that in the long-term, progress – whether economic, social or environmental – is underpinned by the rule of law, good governance, pluralism and freedom."

Comments

[Dale]

Am I the only one feeling a little uneasy about David Cameron's praise for a communist dictatorship with an appauling human rights record?

How can he support a 'one china' policy?This is an issue for the people of taiwan and nobody else, I'm ashamed that the leader of the worlds oldest political party who hopes to be the leader of the world's oldest democracy, wants to see a democratic country consumed by an evil dictatorship regardless of the feelings of the people or the democratically elected government.

David Cameron shouldn't be in china, he should be visiting a country that will not one bring about the apocolypse.

[Tony Makara]

"Yes to free trade. No to protection"

I believe this to be a dangerous policy. The west cannot trade on an equal basis with a manufacturing powerhouse like China. The Chinese has stated quite openly that their objective is to destroy western economic pre-eminence. China is looking to buy up the west, a piece here, a piece there, whenever and wherever an opportunity presents itself the Chinese will buy up another slice of the western economy.

Protectionism will become the economic course of the future, because it has to be, to protect the west from the power of the east. Thankfully many American's are now waking up to the danger that a powerful China represents. We should be shutting the door on China and keeping the Chinese limited to their own Asiatic sphere of influence. We should not be encouraging China to set up its tent in our back garden.

[Dale]

Am I the only one feeling a little uneasy about David Cameron's praise for a communist dictatorship with an appauling human rights record?

How can he support a 'one china' policy?This is an issue for the people of taiwan and nobody else, I'm ashamed that the leader of the worlds oldest political party who hopes to be the leader of the world's oldest democracy, wants to see a democratic country consumed by an evil dictatorship regardless of the feelings of the people or the democratically elected government.

David Cameron shouldn't be in china, he should be visiting a country that will not one bring about the apocolypse.

[Tony Makara]

Dale, I agree that we should pledge full support for the autonomy of Taiwan.

[Raj]

Dale, I can't see where Cameron said he supported the "one China" doctrine - can you quote the bit in question?

In any case, supporting that position doesn't mean the UK supports the invasion of Taiwan. Taiwan needs to reach a deal with China - Beijing won't change its mind because Britain or anyone else supports official recognition of Taiwan's independence. The best thing for the UK to do is continue to support the EU arms embargo and press China to interact with the Taiwanese government.

Tony talks of autonomy. That would require an assertion that Taiwan is part of China but not necessarily give China power over the island. Beijing might accept a face-saving deal to have Taiwan officially part of China, even if it were independent for all real purposes.

[Deputy Editor]

You're right Raj, it was one big issue that he chose to ignore in this speech but a China news agency reported yesterday (and perhaps others?)that he told the Foreign Minister that he would adhere to One China.

[Dale]

Raj,

Hot Sam has already answered your question about cameron and one china, and soon there isn't going to be an eu arms embargo.

[Tony Makara]

Here are a couple of links for anyone interested in following Mr Cameron's visit to China.

http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/

http://www.bjreview.com.cn/

[R.Baker.]

Yes to free trade.No to protection.

Quite a silly statement considering how pro- EU David Cameron and the party is.

[rightsideforum]

Seems like most of that was centred around MONEY£$£$£$£$.

Whatever happened to not torturing your people and preventing democracy because it was the right thing to do?

[Tony Makara]

China often charges its officials with what it terms 'Corruption', this usually means not meeting government targets. Sometimes this corruption charge ends in capital punishment being exacted. I don't feel comfortable about the west cuddling up to this regime. I want to see good relations with all nations, however good relations should not prevent western politicians from being vocal about human rights abuse in China.

[wendy mann]

weird how we can go around pointing fingers at everyone else about their environmental credentials or human rights abuses (arent we calling for the removal of the human rights protections) whilst we happily pollute, and abuse human rights.

how can we talk about prosperity and equality when we have seen increased inequality through education to income and to life chances. we a modern industrialised nation with so much wealth cannot take our poor out of the poverty trap in our society - and this after how many years of exploiting the rest of the world and technological advances.

60% of the world lives on a dollar a day and we abuse them for having eaten this day.