China, Tibet and the Green Party

Madam, - I was disappointed that Neil Steedman (April 17th), in his emotional response, appears to have missed the main points…

Madam, - I was disappointed that Neil Steedman (April 17th), in his emotional response, appears to have missed the main points of my letter of the previous day, which were as follows:

1. By any normal standards of protocol, the Chinese ambassador was treated unfairly by John Gormley, a Minister in our Government and a representative of the Irish people. It is disingenuous of Mr Steedman to suggest that the ambassador knew in advance what Mr Gormley was going to say. If he had, he would not have attended the Green Party conference.

2. Public embarrassment is a particular Chinese cultural sensitivity. Mr Gormley either did not know this and carried on regardless, or he targeted it specifically. Both approaches show poor judgment.

3. As a result of Mr Gormley's actions, Ireland's good relations with China, which have been painstakingly built up over the past 10 years by successive governments, are at risk. This has serious ramifications for Ireland's economy.

READ MORE

4. On account of China's governmental structure and size, change - on any issue - will not occur at the click of Mr Steedman's fingers or because the West says it should. Nonetheless, change is happening and China should be supported in its efforts.

In an increasingly globalised world, all reasonable observers should try to understand the cultural and political intricacies which inform the manner in which foreign governments and political systems work. Unfortunately, this can be difficult when dealing with an emotive issue such as Tibet. However, to suggest that any attempt to achieve such an understanding amounts to "ignorance" or a tolerance of abuse is dishonest and bears all the hallmarks of fundamentalism. - Yours, etc,

KEVIN LYNCH,  Drumcondra, Dublin 9.

Madam, - It is encouraging that Green Party leader John Gormley's comments about human rights concerns in Tibet has sparked debate on your Letters page. I do feel, however, that some of it was rather poor and ungracious and completely missed the point.

One writer chose to raise the issue of human rights concerns in Palestine - a matter of keen ongoing concern to many of us, including Green Party activists. He implied that raising the plight of people in Tibet somehow devalued concerns about Palestine. Can one not discuss one violation of human rights, without immediately mentioning all others that are occurring in the world in the same breath? Regrettably, that would be a very long list.

I cannot understand why some contributors to the Letters page waste time on low-grade sniping at others who raise an issue of real concern. I welcome Mr Gormley's comments about Tibet. Let them become a focus for real debate in Ireland about the plight of a very beleaguered people. - Yours, etc,

RODERIC O'GORMAN, Robin Hill, Macetown, Dublin 15.