UN High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet in Geneva, Switzerland, on November 3, 2021.

 

By Nectar Gan and CNN's Beijing bureau

 

(CNN)Chinese President Xi Jinping defended his country's human rights record on Wednesday, telling a visiting UN official there is "no need for 'preachers' to boss around other countries."

 

Xi's remarks, made in a video call with the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Michelle Bachelet, are likely to add to the controversy surrounding a trip that critics say risks becoming a propaganda tool for Beijing.

 

Bachelet, who arrived in China on Monday for a six-day tour, is expected to visit the far-western region of Xinjiang, where the Chinese government faces accusations of mass internment, forced assimilation, forced labor and forced sterilization against Uyghur and other mostly Muslim minorities.

 

Full story: https://edition.cnn.com/2022/05/25/china/china-xi-jinping-michelle-bachelet-intl-hnk/index.html

 

-- © Copyright CNN 2022-05-26

38 minutes ago, webfact said:

President Xi Jinping defended his country's human rights record on Wednesday, telling a visiting UN official there is "no need for 'preachers' to boss around other countries."

Yes there is when countries such as yours engage in genocide against sections of your own populace.

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Yes there is when countries such as yours engage in genocide against sections of your own populace.

In my opinion 'genocide' is a term, as in your quote, that is thrown around far too causally.

There is absolutely no evidence of genocide in Xinjian. 'Genocide' used to be used in the sense that people were being killed with the aim of exterminate all of their race, creed or other characteristic. Now it is used immediately someone or other is killed in war, or where people deemed to have broken internal laws get locked up (the latter being the case of the Uighurs in Xinjiang). Speaking relatively, the Uighurs are in much better shape than the Rohingya where the label 'genocide' is real and actually refers to their reality of homes being burned by the army and monks, being killed by the army and monks and at best driven to seek refuge in Bangladesh.

Xi is so correct.

 

A Chilean politician, passing judgement on China is laughable.

2 hours ago, Pedrogaz said:

In my opinion 'genocide' is a term, as in your quote, that is thrown around far too causally.

There is absolutely no evidence of genocide in Xinjian. 'Genocide' used to be used in the sense that people were being killed with the aim of exterminate all of their race, creed or other characteristic. Now it is used immediately someone or other is killed in war, or where people deemed to have broken internal laws get locked up (the latter being the case of the Uighurs in Xinjiang). Speaking relatively, the Uighurs are in much better shape than the Rohingya where the label 'genocide' is real and actually refers to their reality of homes being burned by the army and monks, being killed by the army and monks and at best driven to seek refuge in Bangladesh.

There is  plenty of evidence for genocide and the term is appropriate in China's case.

'No need for preachers,' because I am God.

23 minutes ago, Johnnyngai said:

'No need for preachers,' because I am God.

.... of your world, as I am GOD over mine ????

Xi is going full Mao. He's locking out foreign thought, liquidating Uighurs, overwhelming Tibetans with Chinese settlers, while Covid has given him the perfect opportunity to lock up China's entire population and close the borders forever (sorry, Thailand, if you were still expecting Chinese tourists to come back some day). Let's hope the brain aneurysm gets him sooner rather than later.

On 5/26/2022 at 1:59 PM, KhunLA said:

Xi is so correct.

 

A Chilean politician, passing judgement on China is laughable.

A non-Chinese passing judgement on China is laughable?
So I need to ethnically, culturally, and legally Chinese to judge the state of human rights in China?

I swear in another thread right now, you don't seem to believe that is laughable for male to pass moral judgement on abortions.
So which one is it KhunLA?

 

55 minutes ago, Atlantis said:

A non-Chinese passing judgement on China is laughable?
So I need to ethnically, culturally, and legally Chinese to judge the state of human rights in China?

I swear in another thread right now, you don't seem to believe that is laughable for male to pass moral judgement on abortions.
So which one is it KhunLA?

Don't spin it.  I stated 'Chilian', as their track record on human rights isn't the best.  'Kettle & pot thingy', IMHO.

 

Not that any country has the right to judge others.  'Cast the 1st stone' thingy ... ????

12 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Don't spin it.  I stated 'Chilian', as their track record on human rights isn't the best.  'Kettle & pot thingy', IMHO.

 

You can't wrap your head around the fact that this lady is in China as a UN representative, not the Chilean government? 

8 minutes ago, mjnaus said:

You can't wrap your head around the fact that this lady is in China as a UN representative, not the Chilean government? 

She was a Chilean politician, granted, one of the better ones, but still....  

... we have to A2D on anything else.

 

Saudi Arabia was on one of UN's human rights commissions also ... go figure.

 

Not that I hold a high opinion of the UN anyway.  I consider them as corrupt as the members.

 

Just my opinion of course, and think I'm entitled to it, as you are yours.

We still have freedom of expression on the forum to express opinions, last time I checked.

 

 

34 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

She was a Chilean politician, granted, one of the better ones, but still....  

... we have to A2D on anything else.

 

Saudi Arabia was on one of UN's human rights commissions also ... go figure.

Again, the concept of a body such as the UN is apparently lost on you. It's a silly and rather simplistic notion to judge UN representatives by the governments of their homelands... At the very least, wouldn't you agree that these people should be judged on the merit of their own achievements? Would you be so critical of Nelson Mandela, simply because he's from South Africa?

1 hour ago, mjnaus said:

Again, the concept of a body such as the UN is apparently lost on you. It's a silly and rather simplistic notion to judge UN representatives by the governments of their homelands... At the very least, wouldn't you agree that these people should be judged on the merit of their own achievements? Would you be so critical of Nelson Mandela, simply because he's from South Africa?

Mandela ... wrong poster boy in my mind.  Not a fan.   Quite the checkered past.

 

You do realize, or hopefully not, that the 5 permanent members of the UN Security Council, keeping the world safe ???? are some of the top 5 arms dealers in the world.

 

Like I said, not a fan of the UN.   Hypocrisy at its best  .... IMHO  

Feel free to disagree.

 

XI has quite the valid argument, for anyone, from any country to criticize China.   Back to casting that 1st stone again.

 

Have a nice day...

 

6 hours ago, KhunLA said:

Don't spin it.  I stated 'Chilian', as their track record on human rights isn't the best.  'Kettle & pot thingy', IMHO.

 

Not that any country has the right to judge others.  'Cast the 1st stone' thingy ... ????

That's a lame argument!

 

In case you did not notice, Pinochet's regime is long gone. Actually, Michelle Bachelet was an opponent to the dictatorship of Pinochet and a political refugee. As Chilean and as a person, she is fully legitimate to criticize human rights abuse in other countries.