Archive for February 13th, 2010

Saturday, February 13, 2010

Learning Chinese with China’s Top Diplomats

Today:  Ma Chaoxu Ma Zhaoxu (马朝旭), spokesman of the Chinese foreign ministry in Beijing.

A Message from behind the Great Microphone Wall (GMW)

A Message from behind the Great Maikefeng Wall (GMW)

问:2月11日,美白宫发言人答记者问时表示,奥巴马总统拟于18日会见达赖喇嘛。 请问中方对此有何评论?

Question: On February 11, answering journalists’ questions, White House Press Secretary stated that President Obama intended to meet with the Dalai Lama on February 18. What is the Chinese side’s comment on that?


Answer: The Chinese side has issued solemn and just representations concerning the above-mentioned decision by the American side. We resolutely oppose a [disorderly, 窜] visit by the Dalai to America and American leaders having contacts with the Dalai. This position is consistent and clear. For some time now, the Chinese side has repeatedly made earnest representations to the American side concerning the possibility that president Obama would meet with the Dalai . The Chinese side urges the American side to fully understand the high sensitivity of the Tibet question and to abide by the recognition that Tibet is part of China and the commitment to oppose “Tibetan independence, to immediately cancel the wrong decision of arranging a meeting between president Obama and the Dalai, and not to provide the Dalai with any arena and convenience for anti-Chinese splittist activities, and not to damage Tibetan stability by interfering into China’s internal governmental matters, thus avoiding further harm to Chinese-American relations.

Saturday, February 13, 2010

One Convention, Two Interpretations

On your question of foreign diplomats’ request to attend Liu Xiaobo’s trial, the court has handled it according to the relevant regulations and made an explanation. On December 23, the First Intermediate People’s Court of the Beijing Municipality publicly tried the Liu Xiaobo case according to law. What I want to stress is that Liu Xiaobo is a Chinese citizen. The Chinese judiciary handles the case independently according to law. This case is completely China’s internal affair. The so-called “statement” by some officials of certain foreign embassy is a gross interference in China’s domestic judicial affair and a violation of the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations. China expresses its strong dissatisfaction and demands that the country in question respect China’s judicial sovereignty and do not do things that will interfere in China’s internal affairs.

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu, on a press conference on December 25, 2009

“… a matter of increasing controversy is the tension between the duty of a diplomat under Article 41 of the Convention not to interfere in the internal affairs of the receiving State and the opinion of many liberal States that human rights in all countries are a matter of legitimate international concern whose active promotion is a major object of their foreign policy.”

Global Law Books review quoting from Eileen Denza‘s Diplomatic Law, Commentary on the Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations


Document in Question:
Vienna Convention on Diplomatic Relations, 1961

%d bloggers like this: