Germany’s perceived soft stance on China is a misunderstanding that fails to take into account the historical approach of the European country in preferring multilateral dialogue to the use of sanctions, a German history scholar has said.

To comprehend the apparent “German loyalty” toward China, it was necessary to examine Germany’s diplomatic track record of engaging multiple parties rather than accuse it of “licking the boots of the Communist Party of China,” said Liu Bai-li, a PhD student of the history faculty at Ludwig Maximilian University in Germany.

Critics have been decrying German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s reluctance to take a tougher line on Beijing, notably over human rights abuse committed during anti-extradition bill protests in Hong Kong and at detention centers in Xinjiang. Merkel is said to have forsaken human rights and freedom in exchange for her country’s monetary and economic gains by being friendly with China.

She is also noted for having visited China 12 times during her 14 years in office; in the most recent trip, made a year ago, the German leader signed a host of trade agreements with the Chinese on automobiles and advanced technology while dashing hopes that she would put pressure on them over Hong Kong and Xinjiang.

Liu said that to put Berlin’s stance in context, it was worth mentioning the Helsinki Accords, which was a document signed by 35 states in an attempt to reduce tension between the Soviet bloc and the West in 1975.

The Helsinki Accords covered a range of political, military and territorial integrity issues. The Soviet bloc agreed to respect human rights and fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of thought, religion and beliefs, in return for the West’s commitment to respect the territorial integrity of states and not to intervene in their internal affairs.

The inclusion of the principle of human rights and freedoms in the Helsinki Accords ultimately proved to be important to dissidents in eastern Europe and the Soviet Union, who set up the Helsinki Watch Group to draw international attention to rights violations, Liu said.

The multifaceted accords had a far-reaching effect on democratic movements in eastern Europe in the 1980s and accelerated the collapse of the Soviet Union in the 1990s, he said.

Liu was unsure of whether Germany and the European Union would want to reach this kind of agreement to resolve the China issue. However, he believed that the E.U.'s long-running emphasis on multilateral dialogue was influenced by the Helsinki Accords.

He said that it would also be worth observing the future establishment of, and communication among, international human rights groups in terms of how the global human rights movement could create a climate powerful enough to compel the Chinese government to compromise and begin dialogue.

Both Yang Jiechi, head of the Communist Party’s foreign affairs office, and his colleague, Minister of Foreign Affairs Wang Yi, emphasized multilateralism and cooperation during their respective trips to European countries in August.

Johnny Lau, a veteran political commentator on China, said Beijing would be more than happy to sign this kind of international agreement as a respectable way of backing down, but that based on past experience, each country was bound to have its own interpretation of the text used in the agreement.

Click here for Chinese version

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play