Paris, 5 December 2007 – The Assembly has called on the European Union to take cautious steps towards lifting the embargo on arms exports to China which was imposed after the Chinese authorities cracked down on demonstrators in Tiananmen Square in 1989.

A report entitled “The possibilities for cooperation with China in the field of defence equipment”, submitted on behalf of the Technological and Aerospace Committee by Mr Edward O’Hara (United Kingdom, Socialist Group), said the EU should launch a debate “on the possible modalities for lifting the embargo on defence equipment exports to China, with the participation of the European Commission, the Political and Security Committee and the European defence industry” on four conditions.

These include making the EU code of conduct on arms exports legally binding, ensuring China signs up to non-proliferation agreements, stepping up cooperation on research and development and technology projects, and taking account of the possible negative repercussions for competition-sensitive industrial sectors such as launchers. The Assembly also called on China to “demonstrate a firm resolve to move forward” on human rights.

The recommendations, which were adopted by the Assembly, nonetheless warned that scrapping the outdated embargo could “seriously damage transatlantic relations and create tensions not only between the EU and the US, but also within NATO”. The US has repeatedly opposed the idea, while Russia’s “lack of interest” in such a move could be explained by the fact that it is the second largest exporter of major conventional weapons to China, the report noted.

The speakers from the floor were divided during the pre-vote debate. Mr John Prescott (United Kingdom, Socialist Group) and Mr Paul Wille (Belgium, Liberal Group) both endorsed an end to the embargo.

Mr Prescott said the EU “must take the new road of cooperation, not the old road”, and put an end to “fears that dominate thinking on cooperation”. He noted that Europe did not have today’s human rights rules when it undertook its industrial revolution more than 100 years ago. “China wants to play a peaceful role, (and) takes part in United Nations operations”. It prevented a meltdown when it declined to devalue the yuan during the Asian financial crisis and ensured that the Group of 77 developing countries did not scupper the Kyoto protocol on climate change. “We want to keep them in the camp”, he added. Mr Wille said that “we must take the new realities as they are”, and that no attempt should be made to impose Western values on China. “If we think the Chinese public wants European-style democracy, we are mistaken”, he said. “The great majority fear that economic growth would suffer if our system were introduced”.

Joachim Hörster (Germany, Federated Group), on the other hand, opposed the idea of lifting the embargo because “nothing has changed” on the human rights front since the Tiananmen events. The reasons that led to imposing the embargo continue to exist”. China pressured North Korea to abandon its nuclear programme because it had “strong personal interests” in doing so, he added. Ms Kari Lise Holmberg (Norway) acknowledged the report’s finding that China has achieved significant change in a number of areas, but “not in human rights.”  She cited China’s failure to act when the recent pro-democracy demonstrations in Myanmar (Burma) were crushed, and said that the EU should continue to push China on the human rights issue as part of the strategic partnership between the two.

Summing up, Mr O’Hara said the recommendations were “forward-looking and cautious, (…) recognising the difficulties and problems, warts and all”, and that “if we don’t work with China, the alternatives are worse”. The issue is “not just the market,” he added. The EU cannot wait for “completion to our satisfaction” on human rights, whatever that might be, because “opportunities will pass us by”.