September, 24 2010, 03:52pm EDT
Statement on Tibet at the Human Rights Council
Oral statement during the general debate
NEW YORK
Human Rights Watch is concerned about the
situation of the Tibetan minority nationality in the People's Republic
of China as they continue to be the target of systematic governmental
repression. The Chinese government continues to drastically restrict
access to the Tibetan areas of China aside from a handful of
closely-supervised government-organized tours for selected international
media or foreign diplomats.
In a new report issued on July 2010, Human Rights Watch documented
the widespread abuses committed by Chinese security forces in
suppressing the Spring 2008 wave of Tibetan protests. Human Rights Watch
does not dispute that the Chinese government has the duty to maintain
public order and prosecute violent protesters, and that a number of
incidents in 2008 involved violence or had the potential to devolve into
violence. Yet the report also found that Chinese security forces had
used disproportionate force and acted with deliberate brutality during
and after the protests.
In addition, the report showed that officials in Tibet have yet to
account for hundreds of detainees arrested in the wake of the unrest,
and that the highly politicized judicial system continues to preclude
any possibility of protesters being judged fairly. More than two years
after the protests, disappearances, wrongful convictions and
imprisonment, persecution of families, and the targeting of Tibetans
suspected of sympathizing with the protest movement continue unabated.
China must release all detainees that have not been charged or who
have been detained for exercising their freedom of expression. China
must release accurate information about those killed and injured by
security forces and hold accountable, in a manner consistent with
international human rights law, those responsible for using excessive
use of force against unarmed protesters.
Mr. President, in September 2009, the United Nations High
Commissioner for Human Rights, Navanethem Pillay, identified
"discrimination and the failure to protect minority rights" as
"underlying causes" behind the protests in Tibet. Despite repeated calls
over the past two years the Chinese government has not allowed the High
Commissioner or special rapporteurs to visit the region.
In fact China has not agreed to a vast majority of Special Procedures
requests to visit the country. Requests from the Special Rapporteurs or
experts on freedom of expression, toxic waste, health and human rights,
extrajudicial executions, extreme poverty, human rights defenders, the
right to adequate housing, minority issues and access to safe drinking
water and sanitation are all pending. An agreed visit for the Special
Rapporteur on freedom of religion has been pending since 2004 and we
have yet to see the whether the Special Rapporteur on right to food will
actually be able to visit the country. Human Rights Watch urges the
Human Rights Council to call on the Chinese government to allow such
visits to take place as a matter of urgency. Mr. President, at this
session the High Commissioner said that the curtailment of civil
society's scope of action in countries such as China was disturbing.
China's efforts to suppress human rights defenders voices even at this
council is a sad sign of its intransigence. The Human Rights Council
should call on China to abide by its international human rights
obligations and respect human rights defenders' right to work freely and
safely for the protection of human rights in China.
Human Rights Watch is one of the world's leading independent organizations dedicated to defending and protecting human rights. By focusing international attention where human rights are violated, we give voice to the oppressed and hold oppressors accountable for their crimes. Our rigorous, objective investigations and strategic, targeted advocacy build intense pressure for action and raise the cost of human rights abuse. For 30 years, Human Rights Watch has worked tenaciously to lay the legal and moral groundwork for deep-rooted change and has fought to bring greater justice and security to people around the world.
LATEST NEWS
Trump's Unprovoked War on Iran Triggers 10% Spike in Global Oil Prices
"When global energy security can be upended by a single flashpoint, it shows how unstable and risky our dependence on oil and gas is," said one critic.
Mar 02, 2026
President Donald Trump's unprovoked, unconstitutional, and politically unpopular war against Iran is about to cause pains for Americans at the gas pump.
CNBC reported on Monday that Brent crude oil prices surged by 9.3% to a 52-week high of $79.40 per barrel, while US West Texas Intermediate crude oil prices spike by 9% to $73.10 per barrel.
This spike in oil prices is projected to directly lead to an increase in gas prices in the coming days.
Petroleum industry analyst Patrick De Haan noted in a Monday update on his Substack page that gas prices in the US had already risen by roughly six cents in the last week, and that war with Iran would drive these prices higher.
"Developments surrounding Iran—particularly any threat to regional production or shipping flows—are likely to remain the dominant driver of oil prices," wrote De Haan, "and could keep crude elevated or push it higher if tensions intensify further."
A Sunday research note from Wells Fargo cited by CNBC drew attention to the importance of the Strait of Hormuz, which the Iranian government closed off over the week and which is used to transport roughly 20% of the global supplies of petroleum and liquified natural gas.
According to Wells Fargo, a "prolonged" closure of the strait would result in "an oil shock to $100+ per barrel," which it described as the "worst-case scenario" for global stock markets.
In addition to closing off the Strait of Hormuz, Iran has also been launching attacks on other nations' energy infrastructure.
According to a report from Bloomberg, Saudi Arabia’s largest oil refinery at Ras Tanura had to cease operations on Monday after being struck in a drone attack.
"An attack on major energy infrastructure is a nightmare scenario for global markets," noted Bloomberg, "with maritime traffic through the crucial Strait of Hormuz all but halting."
Olivia Langhoff, managing director at climate justice organization 350.org said that the global economic disruptions being caused by the Iran war shows the folly of continuing to rely on fossil fuels for energy needs.
"When global energy security can be upended by a single flashpoint, it shows how unstable and risky our dependence on oil and gas is," Langhoff said. "Renewable energy provides homegrown power that remains secure and affordable regardless of geopolitical shocks."
Langhoff's comments were echoed by Mads Christensen, executive director of Greenpeace International.
"As long as our world runs on oil and gas, our peace, security and our pockets will always be at the mercy of geopolitics," Christensen explained. "Increasing output may temporarily ease price pressures, but it does not address the structural vulnerability at the heart of this recurring crisis: the world’s continued dependence on fossil fuels."
The increase in gas prices comes at a time when US voters have been expressing widespread dissatisfaction with the economy under Trump, as polls show voters have been particularly anxious about the prices of groceries and utilities, among other essentials.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Only 25% of Americans Support Trump Attack on Iran: Poll
"If this goes on... this is going to become a political disaster," said one foreign policy expert.
Mar 02, 2026
President Donald Trump's war in Iran is extraordinarily unpopular, according to a poll conducted shortly after the US and Israel carried out massive strikes on the country Saturday.
The survey, conducted by Reuters/Ipsos, found that just 27% of voters approved of the strikes, which have killed at least 555 Iranians as of Monday morning and resulted in retaliation from Iran that has killed at least four US service members, with more casualties expected according to a spokesperson for the US Joint Chiefs of Staff.
Meanwhile, 43% of respondents disapproved of the military action, while 29% said they were not sure.
A majority of Republicans said they approved of the strikes, with 55% expressing support. Still, 13% disapproved, and a noteworthy 31% said they were unsure.
Approval is dismal with nearly everyone else. Only 19% of independents expressed support compared to 44% who disapproved. And though Democratic leaders in Congress have done little to stand in the way of the strikes, their voters are overwhelmingly against them: 74% said they disapproved, while just 7% approved.
The poll reflects a wider skepticism of US military intervention, with 56% of respondents saying the president was too quick to deploy military force in recent months, including in Venezuela, Syria, and Nigeria.
Compared with previous US military interventions in the Middle East, such as the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan, which—at least at their outset—enjoyed broad support from the American public following intense government efforts to drum up support, there has been little effort by the Trump administration to define the purpose of war with Iran.
Trump's justification for launching the war has shifted wildly since he began amassing troops in the region. Trump has most recently said the strikes were intended to stop an "imminent threat" from Iran; meanwhile, the Pentagon has told Congress there was no sign Iran was planning an attack unless the US did so first.
The president previously said his push for war was to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, an assertion at odds with his claim that his strikes in June "obliterated" the country's nuclear capabilities.
Trita Parsi, executive vice president of the Quincy Institute for Responsible Statecraft, told Al Jazeera that Trump's shifting explanations reek of "desperation."
"It's very clear that Trump has a tremendous difficulty finding a justification for this war of choice that he's embarked on," he said. "The reality is that if this goes on for another week or two, this is going to become a political disaster."
"So now he's suddenly, desperately, using all kinds of justifications: Liberating the Iranian people, Iran is fighting against civilization," Parsi said. "If he actually had a case, he would have stuck to that point and made it clearly. But he doesn't have one."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Call Grows to Impeach Trump, 'The Most Dangerous Man on the Planet'
"Trump’s illegal war on Iran and the rule of law," said one pair of campaigners, "establish an intolerable pattern of egregious abuses of power, directly threatening our constitutional order, our safety, and our way of life."
Mar 02, 2026
After the unprovoked bombing of Iran over the weekend by the United States and Israel—strikes that included the unlawful assassination of Iranian Supreme Leader Ali Hosseini Khamenei—the call for US President Donald Trump to be impeached and removed from office has grown as the straightest path to hold the US leader to account for the attacks which policy and human rights experts have condemned as a serious war crime.
With a regional war in the Middle East that was already boiling from Gaza to Lebanon and from Syria to Yemen now exploding in the wake of the US-Israeli attacks on Iran, Globe and Mail columnist Debra Thompson on Sunday called Trump "the most dangerous man on the planet."
"Rather than ending wars," Thompson notes, "Trump has initiated military action eight times, carrying out attacks in seven countries (Syria, Iraq, Iran, Nigeria, Yemen, Somalia, and Venezuela) in 2025." Such a pattern of violence and warmongering should make clear that failure to restrain Trump has only emboldened him.
"The recurring danger in this latest presidential aggression is that there are no guardrails, no constraints, and no post-hoc justification," writes Thomson, "other than that Mr. Trump is the President of the United States and can do whatever he wants."
But American presidents cannot simply do whatever they want. According to a Reuters/Ipsos poll out Sunday, less than 25% support the president's aggression against Iran. In the first wave of the US military attack, an Iranian school for girls was bombed, killing over 108 civilians, mostly children.
While some congressional lawmakers are pushing for a vote this week on a War Powers Resolution to curtail US military operations against Iran, others are demanding more robust action from Congress to bring Trump's war-making to an end.
"Under Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution, only Congress has the power to declare war, as well as to raise and support armies, provide and maintain a navy, and fund and regulate the military," declared novelist and political activists Stephen King on Saturday. "Impeach the SOB."
Mike Hersh and Alan Minsky, respectively the communications director and executive director of the Progressive Democrats of America, argued in a Sunday op-ed for Common Dreams that "Trump's illegal, unconstitutional war on Iran is not only a moral and humanitarian disaster, but also a profound constitutional crisis."
According to Hersh and Minsky:
Trump’s illegal war on Iran and the rule of law establish an intolerable pattern of egregious abuses of power, directly threatening our constitutional order, our safety, and our way of life. These intertwined crises cry out for an immediate, decisive response by the Congress and the US public.
Therefore, PDA demands that all members of Congress, Democrats, Republicans, and Independents alike, uphold their oath of office to defend our constitutional republic. The Constitution offers one and only one remedy when President a repeatedly breaks the law and arrogantly refuses to abide by the limits on the power clearly laid out in the Constitution. That remedy is impeachment, followed by removal from office.
Matt Duss, executive vice president for the Center for International Policy, said that US lawmakers, as well as the American people they represent, "must also be ready to hold the president and his administration accountable for this breach of US and international law."
"The failure to hold past presidents liable for war crimes and related violations of our own laws has helped lead to this dangerous moment, with a seemingly unrestrained president endangering millions of lives with impunity," warned Duss. "The forever wars and the imperial presidency must finally come to an end.”
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular