The Dalai Lama and South Africa’s attitude to human rights (cont.)
The most cogent reason given for the non-delivery of a visa to the Dalai Lama is that given by the Pretoria based Chinese diplomat, Dai Bing. He is reported as saying, with an uncharacteristic lack of inscrutability, that the invitation comes at an inopportune time what with the 60th anniversary of the invasion of Tibet by China, the 50th anniversary of the Dalai Lama fleeing into exile and the first anniversary of the uprising of Tibetan monks against the oppressive yoke of the occupation of their homeland by the Chinese all being contemporaneous with the now abandoned peace conference.
It is also no mere co-incidence that only last week a trade office was opened in Johannesburg by the Chinese for the purpose of dispensing $5 billion of trade/aid into Africa. Back in January the Chinese Foreign Minister said in Johannesburg: "We will continue to have a vigorous aid programme here and Chinese companies will continue to invest as much as possible."
It should come as no surprise that the South African authorities were easily persuaded, if any persuasion was needed, that their best interests would be served by not jeopardizing the $5 billion and by trying to keep the Dalai Lama from using the peace conference as a platform for drawing the attention of the media to the three anniversaries which otherwise may have been overlooked.
It is no surprise because, as a dismayed Archbishop Tutu has pointed out, the disgracefulness of refusing a Nobel Peace Prize winner entry to participate in a peace conference is entirely consistent with the abysmal track record of the South Africa government on human rights issues.
While campaigning politicians of the ruling alliance pay lip service to our culture of human rights, the government perennially undermines our national commitment to human dignity, equality and freedom as guaranteed in the Bill of Rights. The "quiet diplomacy" in respect of that despot Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe, the efforts to make the ICC charges against the Sudanese president, Al Bashir, go away, the vote in favour of the generals in Myanmar, the technically based thwarting of a vote against a motion condemning rape, the coziness with dictators around the world – the list goes on and grows. Kowtowing to Chinese imperialism is the latest wrong turn in foreign policy based not on a culture of human rights but on commercial expediency in our international relations. Even the idea of bilateral engagement with tyrannical regimes preceding any condemnation of their excesses seems not to apply to the mighty Chinese.
It is reported that the ruling alliance is accepting campaign funding from sources which have appalling records of disrespect for and abuse of human rights. While party political funding remains opaque in our aspirationally open and transparent social order, it will not be known whether there is any substance in these reports.
Perhaps a pause for a moment’s reflection on what would in fact serve the best interests of the country, is indicated. It is plain bad manners to extend invitations and then make it impossible for the recipients to accept them. It is also totally counter-productive to refuse a visa on the grounds that the Dalai Lama may distract attention from the world cup soccer and focus it on China’s long and undistinguished track record regarding human rights. It is probable that the Dalai Lama would have humbly and quietly carried out his visit without in any way embarrassing his hosts, all, like him, winners of the Nobel Peace Prize; he has after all visited the country before without placing South Africa in an awkward position. Now, instead, there is a justifiable uproar about the refusal of a visa and South Africa is seen as opportunistic and unprincipled in its decision making around the invitation. This is an international public relations disaster of monumental proportions. That the President was involved in the allegedly "mismanaged" invitation process is inexcusable; it is small wonder that Tutu and De Klerk have washed their hands of the conference as no visa was forthcoming. Understandably the organizers have cancelled the conference, it will not occur – the announced "indefinite postponement" is a threadbare attempt at saving face.
The values of the Constitution are at stake. The state is obliged to respect, protect, promote and fulfill the rights set out in the Bill of Rights. The rights of the persons involved in the peace conference ought to be approached accordingly, those who organized it and arranged for our three living Nobel Peace Prize winners to assist in making it an event of universal inclusivity – as the World Cup itself will hopefully be. These rights include freedom of association, expression and free political activity. All these rights are violated on the altar of political expediency, through government’s preparedness to take the Chinese honeyed lead. The rights of the Dalai Lama to freedom of movement, expression and religion ought not to go unnoticed in the fracas. His response is exemplary. The sheer counter-productivity of banning an internationally revered religious leader and man of peace for fear of upsetting the Chinese, or even of jeopardizing the interests of promoting the World Cup, is breath-taking.
South Africa is a sovereign country which ought not to be dictated to by anyone regarding whom it should or should not admit to its territory. Our nascent culture of human rights and responsibilities is in danger of floundering, our iconic former leaders have suffered embarrassment and our President will be perceived to be weakly vacillating instead of standing up for human rights as he is constitutionally obliged to do. Already the plight of Tibet has been given more exposure than would ever had been the case had the visa been issued. The indomitable Health Minister, Barbara Hogan and a dismayed Justice Kate O’Regan are the heroines of the hour for bravely standing up for our culture of human rights. The petition organized by Zachie Achmat in support of Hogan’s stance deserves to succeed.
Paul Hoffman SC
27 March 2009.