Speech by Arne Melsom of Hong Kong Committee in Norway.

Tibet committee, thank you so much for giving me the opportunity to speak here to you all today, and hopefully also some inside the Ministry too, though they may not hear much of what I say.

(inaudible)

We are here because our government has decided, at least for now, to be represented at Xi Jinping’s propaganda games. During the opening ceremony it is conceivable that Anniken Huitfeldt (Norway’s minister of foreign affairs) stands next to Xi on the grandstand.

When we challenge the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the minister about why this is the plan, we get answers that make little sense.

One example: We are told that the government has a priority of dialogue, and doesn’t support a boycott.

Well, Merethe (Tibet Committee leader) listed a number of countries who will stay away from the games on a diplomatic and political level. But it isn’t the case that Denmark, or New Zealand, two countries who will keep their representatives at home, plans to end all dialogue with China.

Staying away from the propaganda event is not in contradiction with a later dialogue when it is pertinent, outside of the propaganda framing in Beijing.

We are also given other talking points when we ask about why the government has landed on the position it holds, at least so far. We are frequently told that “There is a long tradition for Norwegian government representatives, members of the royal family and so on, to be present during the Olympics.” And so we will act this year, too.

This is a horribly bad argument. Because: There is no tradition for celebrating the Olympic Games in a country where there is an ongoing crime against humanity, as is presently the situation in East Turkestan. Where minorities are persecuted like they are in Tibet and Inner Mongolia. And which betray the promises made to their population, like in Hongkong.

So when the Olympic Games itself breaks every tradition, when the situation in the hosting country is so different, then it would not be the Norwegian government that would break away from a long tradition. It is the IOC, it is Beijing, who are abandoning the tradition. And then the Norwegian government must face reality. They must acknowledge the present situation, and they cannot point to tradition now that the backdrop is one we haven’t seen since 1936.

Then, it is obvious that this is known… we can continue with a dialogue even after the winter games even if we are not present in Beijing. Those who work behind me know this. They are aware of this. And the thing with the winter olympics taking place in a country, it has been in dictatorships before, but not one that comes close to the situation in present day China.

And all this is known to political leaders in the MFA. They afre not incompetent, which they would have been, had they believed in their own rhetoric, but they know what’s going on. I have no doubt about it. I’m sure that there are skilled, I’ve met some of them, civil servants in the MFA, working on China affairs.

And I don’t think that Anniken Huitfeldt has her head so deep in the sand that she believes that China today can be compared to any hosting nation post-Berlin.

So why do they go to Beijing? Here’s a sentence from a document that is quite revealing: “The Norwegian government will do its best to avoid any future damage to bilateral relations.” This is from item 3 in the statement on bilateral relations that has been presented to China.

And it is precisely this that I believe is the reason that, despite the hopeless situation, our government chooses the path of least resistance. And I’m referring to resistance towards the dictatorship, not the popular opinion in Norway. The government doesn’t have the spine to criticize Beijing in a manner that is noticed in China.

The government repeatedly says that they raise human rights concerns in their dialogue with the Chinese authorities. This was the line under the Solberg administration, and it has been adopted by the Gahr Støre administration.

Well. How successful has this been? It has been successful in the sense that they have met the press after talks with representatives for the rulers in Beijing. And then they can inform them that they were given the chance to speak about human rights. And perhaps there is some self-medication involved here, perhaps they sleep well the following night. I don’t know.

But those of us who are actively supporting the oppressed in China, we know that what Norway has done, has had no impact whatsoever. You may well continue with the dialogue, I’m not against that. But in shaping your policies, you must recognize your experience.

The self esteem among government members is of no concern to us. We care about the oppressed. It would really be nice if someone could join us from the MFA and tell me about one person, one organization, in China, who have seen an improved situation after the diplomatic relations were normalized in December 2016.

I claim that the development has been headed in the wrong direction, the situation has worsened substantially, and raising human rights concerns has had absolutely no impact.

Consequently, we need to change our China policy if our goal is to preserve univeral rights as they are defined as the basis for the U.N.

The road out of darkness for the Norwegian policy on China, runs, in my opinion, by tearing the rubbish statement on normalization of bilateral relations into pieces. Then, we can replace the rhetoric excuses with actions. Then, we do away with our self-censorship and refusal to act, which has been the consequence of the sentence I quoted from the statement.

This thing with “We raise human rights”: Human rights is always presented as a foundation for Norway’s foreign policy.

Well. I read through the statement of normalization of bilateral relations, it consists of four items. Under item 1: No reference to human rights. Under item 2: No reference to human rights. Under item 3: No reference to human rights. And for those of you who have any hope for item 4, read it when you get back home.

This is the document, I fail to see another explanation, which commands the policies brought forward by our present administration, as well as the one before it, towards the authorities in China.

What Norway needs is not this statement on normalization. We do however need normalization, a normalization of Norway’s foreign policy, based on values that are treasured among all of us in Norway.

Thank you for your attention.