The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 7 May 2023.
I am appalled at news the Iranian regime executed Swedish-Iranian dual national Habib Chaab.
The UK strongly opposes the death penalty. We call on the regime to stop all executions, now.
We will continue to work with Sweden and other partners to hold this regime to account.
The comments made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, in London on 5 May 2023.
Welcome, your Royal Highnesses, your excellencies, my lords, ladies and gentlemen.
It is a privilege to meet you all this morning at the start of a historic weekend for our country as well as for observers across the world. Tomorrow marks a new era for the United Kingdom.
This chapter of world history will be defined by our efforts to survive and thrive in spite of the immense and unique threats we currently face.
As such, His Majesty the King has asked that sustainability be a central theme of the Coronation. Concern for the state of our planet characterised his work as Prince of Wales and no doubt will distinguish his reign as King.
His Majesty’s government shares his passionate engagement with this pressing issue and has so far set the international standard for climate action.
We have committed £11.6 billion for climate finance, have pledged to reach net zero by 2050 and are tirelessly working to realise the epic potential of the Glasgow Climate Pact. The time for complacency is long gone. The need for action has never been more urgent.
This is true first and foremost for Small Island Developing States. Our friends and partners in SIDS are on the frontline of climate change, suffering from natural disasters, facing catastrophic sea level rises and daunting adaptation challenges.
This is compounded by extraordinary economic challenges. Island economies experienced some of the harshest economic downturns globally as a result of COVID-19.
These unique structural vulnerabilities mean that you deserve all the support and provisions required to protect your people and safeguard your economies.
I recently saw for myself in the Solomon Islands and Papua New Guinea the challenges governments and communities face when it comes to climate change. It touched me deeply. Exposure to extreme elements is a burden whose brunt should be borne by as many powers as possible.
That is why we’ve proposed the expansion of disaster risk finance. We must ensure that the right resources are readily available so that you can respond rapidly to shocks like hurricanes and the loss of critical infrastructures like water and health when they are needed most.
SIDS leadership is unmatched in calling for ambitious climate action. You also have a special role as large ocean states in protecting rich biodiversity and nature.
We want to support your vital leadership. In that spirit we have set out an ambitious vision for SIDS in our development strategy. It is a vision that focuses on climate and economic resilience.
But the UK cannot do this alone – others in the international system must strive to meet this challenge. Our most revered poet, William Shakespeare, once wrote ‘a touch of nature makes the whole world kin’. The dangers of our rapidly transforming environment ought to do the same; ought to alert us all to the perilous prospect of an inhospitable habitat.
The 2024 SIDS Summit is perhaps our last best chance to agree collectively on how to make this happen.
In my view, an international system that is fit for purpose for SIDS is one that is:
We are not there yet. The international community has squandered too much time bickering over the direction our lifeboat should take, rather than attending to its maintenance and plugging potentially lethal leaks.
Reforming international finance is a good starting point for action. Indeed, the international financial system desperately needs reform. The Bridgetown Initiative has been a clarion call for change across the IMF, World Bank and regional development banks.
The UK is prioritising international finance reform to better address developing countries’ needs. And we believe that the 2024 UN SIDS Summit is our opportunity to get priorities right for you.
I will visit Jamaica later this month for the biennial UK-Caribbean Forum and the UK-Jamaica Strategic Dialogue. And beyond the SIDS Summit many of us will gather in Samoa for the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting. I look forward to further discussions at those events including our shared values, our commitment to democracy and our people-to-people links.
We are a proud and vocal partner of SIDS in international forums and will continue to be so. As Prime Minister Mottley said “How many more surges must there be before the world takes action? None are safe until all are safe.”
We must work together. Not just to survive, but to thrive, and to thrive indefinitely. Thank you and welcome to London.
The speech made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, at the Mansion House in London on 25 April 2023.
Even when the emergencies of the day are seemingly all-consuming,
It is vital never to lose sight of the biggest long-term questions.
So tonight I propose to focus on a subject that will define our epoch
and that is China and the UK’s policy towards it.
I’m often asked to express that policy in a single phrase,
or to sum up China itself in one word, whether “threat”, or “partner”, or “adversary”.
And I want to start by explaining why that is impossible, impractical and – most importantly – unwise.
China is one of the few countries which can trace its existence back over two millennia,
to 221BC,
when it was united by the Qin Dynasty.
Time and time again down the centuries, civil war or foreign invasions fractured China into rival kingdoms,
but after every period of turmoil,
China has always re-emerged.
The opening line of the Chinese epic Romance of the Three Kingdoms describes this cycle:
“Empires wax and wane; states cleave asunder and coalesce.”
And long before they coalesced into one polity, the Chinese people created their language and their civilisation.
Their written characters appeared in the Shang Dynasty in the 2nd millennium BC.
Their inventions – paper, printing, gunpowder, the compass – these things transformed the fortunes of the whole of humanity.
These innovations are the key to understanding why China’s economy was among the biggest in the world for 20 of the last 22 centuries,
and why China, in 1820, comprised a third of global GDP – more than America, the UK and Europe combined.
Then calamities struck, one after another;
some caused by foreign aggression;
others coming from within China itself.
The deadliest of which was Mao’s famine, which claimed tens of millions of lives, more than any other famine in human history.
Yet the last 45 years have seen another astonishing reversal.
By releasing the enterprising genius of its people, China has achieved the biggest and fastest economic expansion the world has ever known.
No less than 800 million people have lifted themselves out of poverty,
in a nation that encompasses a fifth of all humanity
and a vast area almost as large as continental Europe from the Atlantic to the Urals.
So forgive me when I say that no punchy catchphrase or plausible adjective can do justice to such a country or to any sensible approach towards it.
If you are looking for British foreign policy by soundbite, I’m afraid you will be disappointed.
My starting point is a recognition of the depth and complexity of Chinese history and civilisation,
and therefore, by extension, of our own policy.
And I rest that policy on a series of premises,
the first of which is
that whatever our differences with China’s leaders,
I rejoice in the fact that so many Chinese people have escaped poverty.
We do not live in a miserable zero-sum world: their gain is our gain.
A stable, prosperous and peaceful China is good for Britain and good for the world.
Looking ahead, I reject any notion of inevitability.
No-one predicted China’s rapid rise from mass starvation to relative prosperity
and today no-one can be sure that China’s economic juggernaut will roll on indefinitely.
Last year, for the first time since Mao’s death in 1976, China’s economy grew no faster than the world economy,
meaning that China’s share of global GDP stayed constant in 2022.
And even if China does become the world’s largest economy in the coming decade,
it may not hold that place for long,
as a declining and ageing population weighs ever more heavily on future growth.
Nor do I see anything inevitable about conflict between China and the United States and the wider West.
We are not compelled to be prisoners of what Graham Allison called the “Thucydides trap”,
whereby a rising power follows the trajectory of ancient Athens,
and collides head-on with an established superpower.
We have agency;
we have choices;
and so do our Chinese counterparts.
Our task is to shape the course of future events, not succumb to fatalism.
And we must face the inescapable reality that no significant global problem
– from climate change to pandemic prevention,
from economic instability to nuclear proliferation –
can be solved without China.
To give up on dialogue with China would be to give up on addressing humanity’s greatest problems.
Even worse, we would be ignoring salient facts, vital to our safety and our prosperity.
As I speak, the biggest repository of health data in the world is in China.
The biggest source of active ingredients for the world’s pharmaceuticals is in China.
And the biggest source of carbon emissions is also in China.
Indeed, China has pumped more carbon into the atmosphere in the last 10 years than this country has since the dawn of the industrial revolution in the 18th century.
How China regulates its data,
how China develops its pharmaceuticals,
how China conducts medical research,
will be of seminal importance to the whole of humanity.
And whether or not China cuts its carbon emissions will probably make the difference between our planet avoiding the worst ravages of climate change, or suffering catastrophe.
We have already learned to our cost how China’s handling of a pandemic can affect the entire world.
So have no doubt: decisions taken in Beijing are going to affect our lives.
Do we not owe it to ourselves to strive to influence those decisions in our own interests?
It would be clear and easy – and perhaps even satisfying –
for me to declare some kind of new Cold War and say that our goal is to isolate China.
It would be clear, it would be easy, it would be satisfying – and it would be wrong,
because it would be a betrayal of our national interest and a willful misunderstanding of the modern world.
Indeed, this Government will advance British interests directly with China, alongside our allies, while steadfastly defending our national security and our values.
And we can expect profound disagreements;
dealing with China I can assure you, is not for the fainthearted;
they represent a ruthless authoritarian tradition utterly at odds with our own.
But we have an obligation to future generations to engage because otherwise we would be failing in our duty to sustain – and shape – the international order.
Shirking that challenge would be a sign
not of strength but of weakness.
Vladimir Putin never intended to demonstrate the power of a united West when he launched his onslaught against Ukraine.
But our response shows that when Britain and America and Europe and our other partners across the world stand united, we are a match for anything.
We should have every confidence in our collective ability to engage robustly and also constructively with China,
not as an end in itself, but to manage risks and produce results.
And we have achieved results.
Let me give you some examples. In 2017 research, British research, convinced the Chinese agriculture ministry to act against the danger of antibiotic resistance by restricting colistin, an antibiotic used in animal feed.
Sales fell by 90 percent, making everyone in the world safer.
Last year, our diplomats in China helped to persuade the authorities to amend a draft procurement law,
improving the chances of UK companies bidding for contracts from state-owned enterprises.
This year, they secured licences worth £600 million for UK institutions to launch fund management companies in China.
Britain’s position as a founding member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank has also allowed us to influence China’s approach towards this new institution,
preventing it from becoming a politicised extension of the Belt and Road Initiative.
China is the biggest shareholder of this Bank, the Bank is headquartered in Beijing,
and yet within a week of Russia’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine,
it froze every single project in Russia.
But even though engagement can succeed,
the truth is that a country like ours,
devoted to liberty and democracy,
will always be torn between our national interest in dealing with China
and our abhorrence of Beijing’s abuses.
When we see how authoritarian states treat their own people, we wonder what they would do to us if they had the chance.
And history teaches us that repression at home often translates into aggression abroad.
So our policy has to combine two currents:
we must engage with China where necessary and be unflinchingly realistic about its authoritarianism.
And that means never wavering from one clear principle.
We do not expect our disagreements with China to be swiftly overcome,
but we do expect China to observe the laws and obligations that it has freely entered in to.
So, as a permanent member of the United Nations Security Council,
China has shouldered a special responsibility to uphold the UN Charter.
As a party to the Joint Declaration,
China has agreed to preserve Hong Kong’s freedom.
As a signatory to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, to the Convention Against Torture and many other instruments of international law,
China has accepted an array of obligations.
And if China breaks them, we are entitled to say so
and we are entitled to act – and we will –
as we did when China dismantled the freedoms of Hong Kong, violating its own pledge,
which is why we gave nearly 3 million of Hong Kong’s people a path to British citizenship.
Peaceful co-existence has to begin with respecting fundamental laws and institutions,
including the UN Charter,
which protects every country against invasion.
And that means every country: a Chinese diplomat in Paris cannot, and must not, and will not, decide the legal status of sovereign countries.
By attacking Ukraine, Russia has provided an object lesson in how a UN member state should not behave.
And Putin has also trampled upon China’s own stated principles of non-interference and respect for sovereignty.
A powerful and responsible nation cannot simply abstain when this happens,
or draw closer to the aggressor,
or aid and abet that aggression.
A country that wants a respected place at the apex of the world order should stand up for its own principles,
and keep its solemn obligations
Obligations to defend the laws at the very foundation of that order.
This responsibility goes hand-in-hand with China’s right to play a global role commensurate with its size and its history.
And the rights of a sovereign nation like Ukraine cannot be eradicated just because the eradicator enjoys a “strategic partnership” with China.
So, British policy towards China has three pillars.
First, we will strengthen our national security protections wherever Beijing’s actions pose a threat to our people or our prosperity.
We are not going to be silent about interference in our political system, or technology theft, or industrial sabotage.
We will do more to safeguard academic freedom and research.
And when there are tensions with other objectives, we will always put our national security first.
Hence we are building our 5G network in the most secure way, not the fastest or the cheapest way.
China’s leaders define their core interests – and it’s natural that they do.
But we have core interests too,
and one of them is to promote the kind of world that we want to live in,
where people everywhere have a universal human right to be treated with dignity,
free from torture, free from slavery, free from arbitrary detention.
And there is nothing uniquely “Western” about these values:
torture hurts just as much whoever it is inflicted upon.
So when Britain condemns the mass incarceration of the Uyghur people in Xinjiang, I hope our Chinese counterparts do not believe their own rhetoric
that we are merely seeking to interfere in their domestic affairs.
Just as we should try harder to understand China, I hope that Chinese officials will understand
that when their government builds a 21st century version of the gulag archipelago,
locking up over a million people at the height of this campaign,
often for doing nothing more than observing their religion,
this stirs something deep within us.
When the United Nations finds that China’s repression in Xinjiang may – and I quote – “constitute international crimes, in particular crimes against humanity”,
our revulsion is heartfelt and shared unanimously across our country and beyond.
We are not going to let what is happened in Xinjiang drop or be brushed aside.
We cannot ignore this simply because this is happening on the other side of a frontier,
or that to raise it might be considered unharmonious or impolite.
Second, the UK will deepen our cooperation and strengthen our alignment with our friends and partners in the Indo-Pacific and across the world.
Our aim will be to bolster collective security, deepen commercial links, uphold international law, and balance and compete where necessary.
So I’m delighted that Britain will soon be the 12th member of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, reinforcing our trading ties with rapidly growing economies.
Already we are the only European country to be a Dialogue Partner of the Association of South-East Asian Nations.
We are deepening our long term partnership with India.
And we are developing the next generation of our aircraft alongside Japan.
And we’ve joined the United States to help Australia to build nuclear-powered conventionally-armed submarines under the AUKUS partnership.
Together with our friends, the UK will strive for openness and transparency in the Indo-Pacific.
At this moment, China is carrying out the biggest military build-up in peacetime history.
In a period of just four years – between 2014 and 2018 – China launched new warships exceeding the combined tonnage of the Royal Navy’s entire active fleet.
And a we see this happening;
as we watch new bases appearing in the South China Sea and beyond,
we are bound to ask ourselves: what is it all for?
Why is China making this colossal military investment?
And if we are left to draw our own conclusions, prudence dictates that we must assume the worst.
And yet of course we could be wrong: it is possible that we will be too cautious and too pessimistic.
The UK and our allies are prepared to be open about our presence in the Indo-Pacific.
And I urge China to be equally open about the doctrine and intent behind its military expansion,
because transparency is surely in everyone’s interests
and secrecy can only increase the risk of tragic miscalculation.
Which brings me to Taiwan.
Britain’s longstanding position is that we want to see a peaceful settlement of the differences across the Strait.
Because about half of the world’s container ships pass through these vital waters every year,
laden with goods bound for Europe and the far corners of the world.
Taiwan is a thriving democracy and a crucial link in global supply chains, particularly for advanced semi-conductors.
A war across the Strait would not only be a human tragedy,
it would destroy world trade worth $2.6 Trillion, according to Nikkei Asia.
No country could shield itself from the repercussions.
Distance would offer no protection from this catastrophic blow to the global economy – and least China’s most of all.
I shudder to contemplate the human and financial ruin that would follow.
So it’s essential that no party takes unilateral action to change the status quo.
And the third pillar of our policy is to engage directly with China, bilaterally and multilaterally, to preserve and create open, constructive and stable relations,
reflecting China’s global importance.
We believe in a positive trade and investment relationship, whilst avoiding dependencies in critical supply chains.
We want British companies to do business with China – just as American, ASEAN, Australian and EU companies currently do –
and we will support their efforts to make the terms work for both sides,
pushing for a level playing field and fairer competition.
We have an interest in continuing to benefit from Chinese investment,
but we don’t want the long arm of the Chinese Communist Party reaching towards the central nervous system of our country.
And in the past, we haven’t always struck the perfect balance between openness and security.
Now we are gaining the right legal powers to safeguard what we must and be open where we can.
Above all, we need to be properly skilled for the challenge,
so we are doubling our funding for China capabilities across Government;
we’ve allocated the resources to build a new British Embassy in Beijing,
I’m determined to reach agreement with China’s government so this can proceed.
So our approach to China must combine all of these currents,
protecting our national security,
aligning with our friends,
engaging and trading with China where our interests converge,
avoiding policy by soundbite,
and always standing up for the universal values which Britain holds dear.
I fervently believe there are no inevitabilities:
the future is ours to shape,
in the humble knowledge
that how we respond to this challenge now will help define the modern world.
Thank you.
The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 24 March 2023.
The Withdrawal Agreement Joint Committee met today, 24 March 2023, in London with delegates attending in person and by video conference. The meeting was co-chaired by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs and European Commission vice-president Maroš Šefčovič. A joint statement was agreed and published on gov.uk.
The Committee welcomed the agreement of the Windsor framework and adopted the new arrangements set out within the framework. The adoption of this agreement restores the free flow of trade from Great Britain to Northern Ireland through a new green lane; it gives the elected representatives of Northern Ireland a veto over new laws that apply there; and it protects Northern Ireland’s place in our Union through fixing practical problems including on pets, parcels and medicines and ensuring that UK decisions on tax and spend benefit people and businesses in Northern Ireland as they do in Great Britain.
The Committee addressed other important issues including the rights of UK nationals in the EU and EU citizens in the UK. Both sides agreed on the importance of continuing to support these citizens and welcomed the efforts made over the past year to do so, including additional funding provided by both sides to external organisations.
The Committee also received an update on the work of the withdrawal agreement specialised committees since the last meeting on 21 February 2022 and adopted the withdrawal agreement annual report for the year 2021 pursuant to article 164(6) of the withdrawal agreement.
The Committee adopted one decision laying down arrangements relating to the Windsor framework.
The Committee also adopted two recommendations:
on market surveillance and enforcement,
on article 13(3a) of the Protocol on Ireland/Northern Ireland
Both the UK and EU made five joint declarations relating to the Windsor Framework:
Joint declaration No 1/2023
Joint declaration on the application of Article 10(1) of the Windsor framework
Joint declaration on Article 13(3a) of the Windsor framework
Joint declaration No 2/2023
Joint declaration on the VAT regime for goods not being at risk for the Union’s internal market and on the VAT arrangements for cross border refunds.
The UK made five unilateral declarations and the EU made unilateral declarations noting these:
Unilateral declaration by the United Kingdom on involvement of the institutions of the 1998 agreement (annex I to the decision No 1/2023 laying down arrangements relating to the Windsor framework)
Unilateral declaration by the United Kingdom on market surveillance and enforcement, noted by the unilateral declaration by the Union
Unilateral declaration by the United Kingdom on export procedures for goods moving from Northern Ireland to other parts of the United Kingdom, noted by the unilateral declaration by the Union
Unilateral declaration by the United Kingdom on the democratic consent mechanism in article 18 of the Windsor framework, noted by the unilateral declaration by the Union.
Unilateral declaration by the United Kingdom on strengthening enforcement action for goods moved in parcels from another part of the United Kingdom to Northern Ireland, noted by the unilateral declaration by the Union.
The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, in the House of Commons on 24 March 2023.
The Trade and Co-operation Agreement Partnership Council met today, 24 March 2023, in London, with delegates attending in person and by video conference.
The meeting was co-chaired by my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs and European Commission vice-President Maroš Šefčovič. Representatives from the Scottish Government, Welsh Government and Northern Ireland Executive attended, as did representatives from the Crown dependencies of the Isle of Man, Guernsey and Jersey. 27 EU member state representatives also attended. A joint statement was agreed and published on gov.uk.
The Partnership Council discussed implementation of the TCA and cooperation in a range of areas including energy, regulation, security and Union Programmes.
The Partnership Council supervises the operation of the TCA, providing strategic direction to the work of the Trade Partnership Committee and 18 specialised committees.
The UK restated its commitment to co-operating with the EU through the Trade and Co-operation Agreement Partnership Council.
The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 7 April 2023.
The UK condemns the indiscriminate rocket attacks from southern Lebanon and Gaza and recognises Israel’s right to self-defence. Now is the time for all parties across the region to de-escalate tensions.
At the convergence of Passover, Ramadan and Easter, the UK calls for all parties to respect the historic Status Quo arrangements at Jerusalem’s holy sites and cease all provocative action.
The UK is a strong supporter of freedom of religion or belief and calls for places of worship to be respected. We value Jordan’s important role as custodian of the holy sites in Jerusalem and condemns the Israeli police violence at the Al Aqsa Mosque. When Israeli security forces conduct operations, they must ensure they are proportionate and in accordance with international law. Israel and the Palestinian Authority must take steps to honour the commitments agreed at Sharm el-Sheikh and Aqaba.
Peace will only be sustainable if both Israelis and Palestinians recommit themselves to a negotiated settlement, leading to a two-state solution of a secure Israel side by side with a viable Palestinian State.
The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 27 March 2023.
The UK welcomes the decision today by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to pause legislation to reform Israel’s judiciary.
The UK enjoys a deep and historic relationship with Israel. As the Prime Minister stressed in his meeting with PM Netanyahu last week, it is vital that the shared democratic values that underpin that relationship are upheld, and a robust system of checks and balances are preserved.
We urge all parties to find common ground and seek a long-term compromise to this sensitive issue.
The statement made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 6 March 2023.
The UK welcomes the statements today from South Korea and Japan as they seek to resolve sensitive historic issues. We support both our partners in their efforts to form closer ties. Our world can only be stronger and safer when we work together in support of our shared interests and values.
The speech made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 1 March 2023.
The United Kingdom commends Nigerian voters for their participation in the Presidential and National Assembly elections and for their patience and resilience in exercising their democratic rights. We congratulate the President Elect, Senator Bola Ahmed Tinubu.
We note the position of opposition parties on the election outcome and the concerns expressed by observer missions and civil society about the organisation of the process, including delays and technical challenges. We encourage the authorities to examine all concerns carefully, take action to resolve outstanding issues and focus on delivering the will of the Nigerian people.
The speech made by James Cleverly, the Foreign Secretary, on 27 February 2023.
Mr President, 75 years ago, Eleanor Roosevelt dubbed our newly adopted Universal Declaration of Human Rights ‘an international Magna Carta’. She was referring, of course, to that Great Charter’s role in laying the first of the many foundation stones on which the concept of human rights has been built.
In 1215, it established that sovereign power is limited by legal constraint. That States are answerable to their citizens. And that justice requires due process. Inspired by Magna Carta, generations of lawyers and statesmen in the United Kingdom and around the world created what we now call the rule of law.
But for centuries, the rule of law stopped at national borders. Until 1948, our predecessors took a gigantic step forward for humankind and made the rule of law universal.
I’m proud of my country’s long role in the struggle for human rights. A struggle that continues today across the world.
Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and illegal so-called annexations are a blatant violation of international law and the UN Charter.
The Commission of Inquiry, which this Council established last year, has concluded that war crimes have been committed in Ukraine. Abuses and violations of human rights have been committed by Russian forces on a systematic scale: torture and killing of civilians, rape and sexual violence, forced deportation.
The Human Rights Council must condemn Russia’s actions. We cannot allow this behaviour to go unanswered. These barbaric acts must never be repeated. The Ukrainian people must have justice.
That is why this session must renew the Commission of Inquiry’s mandate.
We remind Russia of the international human rights obligations, which it has freely undertaken. And of its obligations under the UN Charter.
We call upon Russia to:
But the Ukrainians are not Putin’s only victims.
We call for the release of all those detained in Russia on political grounds, including Alexei Navalny. And for those imprisoned for their opposition to Russia’s illegal war in Ukraine, like Vladimir Kara Murza, to be freed.
Together with our international partners, the UK has invoked the OSCE’s Moscow Mechanism which evidenced Russia’s repression of its own people.
We will support the UN Special Rapporteur’s work on human rights in Russia. We will attend the trials of human rights defenders in Russia. And we will use sanctions to hold human rights violators to account.
Last year, the High Commissioner for Human Rights published a report that found evidence of arbitrary detention, torture, sexual and gender-based violence, forced sterilisation, and the destruction of religious sites taking place in Xinjiang. And it found these abuses may amount to crimes against humanity.
Surely, such serious and well-evidenced findings merit further and proper discussion by this Council. But instead China has consistently sought to deny these findings and obstruct discussion.
I now urge China to engage with the Council and uphold the international obligations into which it has freely entered.
Last year, the Human Rights Committee published its report on the implementation of the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights in Hong Kong.
Under the National Security Law, independent media outlets have been closed down. The right to freedom of speech and assembly guaranteed in Hong Kong’s Basic Law has been eroded. Those who speak out, including journalists or businessmen like Jimmy Lai, have been arrested.
We call on the Hong Kong and Chinese authorities to uphold the Sino-British Joint Declaration and urge them to implement the recommendations of the HRC Report.
In Afghanistan, curtailment of women’s human rights, including the ban on women going to university, is unacceptable. We will continue to press the Taliban on these issues.
In Iran, the killing of Mahsa Amini last September was yet another shocking reminder of the regime’s callous disregard for the lives of its own citizens. Since October, we’ve introduced 5 separate sanctions packages targeting those individuals and entities responsible for serious human rights violations.
We reaffirm our commitment to support the fact-finding mission established by this Council in November. We must ensure that the voice of the Iranian people continues to be heard.
Mr President, the United Kingdom will always ensure that human rights are upheld around the world and that we hold to account those who systematically violate them.
To achieve this, we want this Council to succeed. We will work with our international partners to ensure that it does. And we will back up our words with actions.
Thank you.