september 2018

Swedish satire show takes another hit at China

Last weekend I wrote (in Swedish) about the satire show ”Swedish News”, that created a minor diplomatic row between Sweden and China by broadcasting a segment about Chinese tourists that many deemed as racist.

The content led the Chinese authorities to demand an apology not only from the Swedish public television (SVT), but also from the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Then, a war of words begun.

The Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs would not apologise, instead saying that Sweden enjoys freedom of speech and the press. SVT would not apologise to the Chinese authorities either, but did however issue an apology to any individuals that might have been offended by the content of the show.

Unsurprisingly, this was not enough for the Chinese authorities. As South China Morning Post describes closer in the article ”Chinese embassy rejects second Swedish apology for satire on tourists”, the authorities kept demanding an even stronger apology from SVT.

On the Chinese embassy’s website, it threatened to take ”further actions” against SVT would such an apology not take place. Apart from the racist segments, the embassy also wanted an apology for ”Swedish News” publishing a map of China that did not include Taiwan.

During the last week, China’s embassy has issued no less than four (4!) press statements regarding the TV show:

The Chinese Embassy Spokesperson’s Remarks on SVT’s Program Insulting China” (22 Sep)
The Chinese Embassy Spokesperson Once Again Urges SVT to See its Mistake and Make Sincere Apology” (25 Sep)
The Chinese Embassy Spokesperson: Never Accept a Hypocritical ’Apology’” (27 Sep)
The Chinese Embassy Spokesperson: Firmly Oppose Ill-Intentioned ’Apologies’” (29 Sep)

The last statement came after ”Swedish News”, which is a weekly show, last night did a very clever follow up on last week’s program.

In yesterday evening’s show, the host Jesper Rönndahl begun by apologising to every Chinese citizen that might had been offended by lat week’s content.

Then, he makes clear that there will be no apology whatsoever to the Chinese authorities, instead setting out bashing the political climate in China and its lack of freedom of speech and the press.

After complaints over a map of China were Taiwan was not included, ”Swedish News” said they would this week publish a map including all the territories claimed by China.

After having apologised to any Chinese citizens that might have been offended by the show last week, host Jesper Rönndahl went on to scold the political climate and the lack of freedom of speech and the press in China. A part of the forced confession made by Swedish citizen Gui Minhai was included in the segment.

Within hours after yesterday’s show, the Chinese embassy issued a press statement which included the following text:

These ”apologies” have no seriousness or sincerity at all. They have evaded the racist nature of the program, ignored the sinophobic contents and insults on China, and disregarded the harm to the national sentiment and dignity of China. Now the program has deliberately and viciously attacked the Chinese Government, and attempted to put the Chinese people against the Chinese Government, which is extremely ill-motivated. The Chinese Government enjoys full support of the nearly 1.4 billion Chinese people.

It is obvious that Chinese authorities are even more irritated after yesterday’s show, which brilliantly apologised to the Chinese people, but the same time criticised the Chinese Communist Party.

As a clever finish of yesterday night’s show, the house band played ”Hey Sweden”, the song that nationalist rapper Pissy used to attack Jesper Rönndahl.

During the show, Rönndahl also explained that Pissy is a propaganda troll on the Chinese regime’s payroll.

Kom och säg hej på bokmässan i Göteborg!

Detta veckoslut äger den årliga Bokmässan rum mellan torsdag och söndag på Svenska mässan i Göteborg. Jag kommer närvara under samtliga dagar, och delta i en rad samtal och presentationer men anledning av lanseringen av min femte bok.

Det är ju sällan jag är i Sverige och har möjlighet att träffa såväl mina läsare eller kollegor. Men den som planerar att gå på årets bokmässa kan nu träffa mig på följande platser och tider:

* Torsdag förmiddag 10:30-10:45, samtal i Dagens Nyheters monter om situationen för journalister i Kina respektive Mexico. DN:s korrespondent Erik de la Reguera medverkar, samtalet leds av tidningens kulturchef Björn Wiman.

* Torsdag eftermiddag 13:30-14:00, samtal i Expressens monter med anledning av lanseringen av min nya bok. Nordstedts förlagschef Eva Gedin medverkar, samtalet leds av Expressens kulturchef Karin Olsson.

* Torsdag kväll från och med 17:30, mingel i Historiska Medias monter med start 17:30.

* Fredag förmiddag från och med 10:30, samtal med Johan Hakelius i magasinet Fokus monter.

* Fredag eftermiddag 16:20-17:00, samtal om Gui Minhai och det politiska läget i Kina på Stora scenen. Medverkar gör även Jesper Bengtsson (Svenska PEN), Kristenn Einarsson (ordförande International Publishers Association), Svante Weyler (förläggare), Elisabeth Åsbrink (journalist och författare). Samtalet leds av Frida Edman, ordförande för Bokmässan.

* Lördag förmiddag 11:20-11:30, samtal i Nordstedts monter med anledning av lanseringen av min nya bok.

* Söndag förmiddag 11:30-12:00, samtal på Debattscenen om mänskliga rättigheter och handel med Kina. Medverkar gör även Christer Ljungwall, ekonom bosatt i Kina. Samtalet leds av Ivar Ekman från Sveriges Radio.

Jag kommer också ha tid att träffa och tala med folk mellan dessa event. Så om du ska till bokmässan, tveka inte att maila mig på jojje@inbeijing.se

Tankar om turister, tv-satir och Kinas ständiga krav på ursäkt

Under september har relationen mellan Kina och Sverige nått någon slags ny bottennivå. Ett par händelser har fått Kina att kräva offentliga ursäkter från svenskt håll. Det är dock extremt viktigt att vi inte ger vika här, trots hotet om ett minskat antal kinesiska turister eller ett på andra vis försämrat ekonomiskt utbyte.

Den första händelsen rör givetvis fallet med tre kinesiska turister som avvisades från ett hotell i Stockholm av svensk polis. Som jag tidigare skrivit, så krävde turisterna att få övernatta i lobbyn och vägrade lämna hotellet när personalen sade åt dem att gå.

Kinas ambassad och utrikesministerium krävde sedan en ursäkt, kompensation samt att poliserna som avvisade familjen skulle straffas, trots att de handlat helt enligt rådande föreskrifter. Ambassaden utfärdade rentav en varning för kinesiska turister att resa till Sverige, med anledning av att kineser hanterats ”mycket våldsamt” av svenska tjänstemän.

Varningen kan ses som en diplomatisk påtryckning. Hot om att minska antalet kinesiska turister används ofta av myndigheterna som ett slagträ mot länder som Kina hamnat i dispyt med.

Det är dock osannolikt att Sverige kommer utfärda någon ursäkt till de kinesiska turisterna. Efter en lång stunds tystnas tog utrikesminister Margot Wallström bladet från munnen i fredags och sade att bråket var ”över”. Hon menade att det är polisens och inte Utrikesdepartementets sak att hantera denna situationen. Gott så.

Sedan skapade en andra händelse en ny konflikt vid veckoslutet. Detta efter att satirprogrammet Svenska Nyheter sänt ett inslag i Sveriges Television i syfte att göra humor av vad som skett.

Många upplevde – med rätt eller orätt – detta inslag som rasistiskt. Så även Kinas ambassad, som i helgen utfärdade följande pressmeddelande på sin hemsida:

The SVT program and Jesper Rönndahl spread and advocate racism and xenophobia outright, and openly provoke and instigate racial hatred and confrontation targeting at China and some other ethnic groups. The program also referred to a wrong map of China where China’s Taiwan province and some part of the Tibet region were missing, which severely infringes on China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. The program breaks the basic moral principles of mankind, and gravely challenges human conscience and is a serious violation of media professional ethics. To think that such things could happen in Sweden, an advocate of ethnic equality!

Relevant program staff from SVT argued that this is an entertainment program, an argument which is totally unacceptable and we firmly reject. We urge SVT and the program to immediately give an apology. We reserve the rights to take further actions.

Fetstilen är tillagd av mig. Det är nämligen denna del av pressmeddelandet som är allra viktigast. Låt mig förklara varför.

Till att börja med anser jag det meningslöst att diskutera huruvida inslaget var rasistiskt. Det var det med största sannolikhet, även om många påpekar att det handlar om satir samt att de klipp som nu cirkulerar på nätet har tagits ut sitt sammanhang.

Jag har själv inte ens sett hela programmet. Att SVT ska be kinesiska myndigheter om ursäkt bara för att regimen så kräver är ändå helt förkastligt, oavsett hur rasistiskt inslaget må vara.

Det är i sammanhanget viktigt att notera hur den statliga kinesiska tv-kanalen CCTV har paraderat de svenska medborgarna Gui Minhai och Peter Dahlin i rutan, där de tvingats avge flera falska ”erkännanden” vilka föregåtts av psykisk och sannolikt även fysisk tortyr.

CCTV har inte bett om ursäkt för detta. Så självklart är det nonsens samt en ren och skär maktutövning att kräva att SVT måste be om ursäkt för ett satirinslag.

Att följa kravet vore dessutom farligt. Som svenska forskare och analytiker denna vecka har påpekat, så är Sverige ”måltavla för ett nytt kinesiskt experiment med hårda politiska påtryckningar”.

Kina provar helt enkelt nu hur långt man kan gå. I vilka sammanhang kan man använda ekonomiska eller andra påtryckningar för att tvinga sig till ursäkter eller politiska eftergifter från mindre länder som Sverige?

Följande är således alldeles självklart: om SVT skulle be om ursäkt bara för att kinesiska myndigheter kräver det, så kommer många flera liknande krav från kinesiskt håll att komma mot svenska medier och myndigheter i framtiden. Så kan vi helt enkelt inte ha det.

Lyckligtvis så verkar det heller inte finnas några planer från SVT:s håll på att be om ursäkt. Såhär beskriver en av kanalens programchefer situationen:

En tjänstemän på ambassaden var under lördag förmiddag i kontakt med Thomas Hall, programchef på SVT Nöje, för att protestera mot innehållet i programmet.

– Han var ledsen och arg för att SVT sände något han uppfattade som rasistiskt. Jag försökte säga att vi gör det motsatta, driver med nidbilden av kineser och asiater, säger Thomas Hall till SVT Nyheter.

– Han köpte inte det utan krävde en ursäkt och ett borttagande av programmet. Jag förklarade att vi inte kan be om ursäkt eftersom jag anser att vi inte har gjort något fel, säger Thomas Hall till SVT Nyheter.

Istället för att komma gapandes med hot så borde den kinesiska ambassaden anmäla inslaget till Granskningsnämnden för radio och TV.

SVT producerar material efter svenska regler och bestämmelser. Har programmet brutit mot dessa så kommer man fällas av GRN. Kina ska i detta avseende inte behandlas annorlunda än andra aktörer med liknande klagomål.

Vad kommer då hända om SVT och Utrikesdepartementet inte ber Kina om ursäkt? På kort sikt får vi säkert se en rad påtryckningar som kan ha negativa konsekvenser för det ekonomiska utbytet med Kina.

Nu under helgen utfärdade Kinas ambassad exempelvis den fjärde(!) och hittills mest allvarliga varningen för kinesiska turister som planerar besöka Sverige.

Pressmeddelandet finns här på kinesiska, och har översatts till engelska av What’s on Weibo:

September 23: The Chinese Embassy in Stockholm issues another safety alert for Chinese in Sweden, warning Chinese to pay extra attention to their safety in China, saying: “We remind Chinese citizens in Sweden to pay attention to their safety. Since April of this year, we have received daily reports from Chinese about being robbed, having things stolen and losing documents, but the Swedish police so far have not investigated any cases. We cannot effectively guarantee the legal rights of Chinese citizens [here].”

Och hur har kinesiska myndigheter tänkt att straffa SVT, vilket ambassaden hotade med på sin hemsida? Det är värt att notera att SVT har en korrespondent på plats i Kina. Det vore inte osannolikt att denne får problem med sitt visum om SVT inte hörsammar kravet på en ursäkt.

På kort sikt riskeras alltså såväl ekonomi som access till Kina om inga ursäkter utfärdas. Men givetvis är riskerna längre på långt sikt, om Kina upptäcker att man har svenska medier och myndigheter lindade runt sitt finger.

Då kommer dessa hot utan tvekan att upprepas flera gånger i framtiden när Kina vill ha sin vilja genom, vilket de facto skulle innebära ett hot mot svenska myndigheters och mediers självständighet.

Lyckligtvis verkar fler svenska medier än SVT ha insett detta. Här är några exempel på ledarartiklar i ämnet:

Turistbråket är en bricka i ett smutsigt spel” (Expressen)
Kina vapenskramlar med plånboken” (Dagens Nyheter)
Turistteatern senaste kinesiska pinsamheten” (Göteborgs-Tidningen)

Se det omtalade inslaget från SVT nedan:

Sweden to stop deportations of all Uyghurs to China

September 5, I wrote the article ”Sweden about to deport a Uyghur family to Xinjiang”, and a week later also an update on this case.

The story concerns a Uyghur family of four who were denied asylum to Sweden by both the Migration Board and the Migration Court, and told to contact the Chinese embassy to arrange their return to Xinjiang. The decision was made by staff that apparently did not have sufficient knowledge about the situation in the Xinjiang region.

Now, however, the Swedish Migration Board have decided to temporary stop carrying out deportations of Uyghurs and other minorities back to China. This also applies to cases were asylum have already been denied, such as the above mentioned family, who will not be forced to return to Xinjiang and the almost certain repression awaiting them there.

I just spoke on the phone with Per Hedqvist, senior analyst at the section for information analysis at the Migration Board, who has been involved with the decision.

Hedqvist works with updating the LIFOS database on the current political situation in different countries, that the Migration Board is using as basis for its asylum decisions (described more in detail in my earlier post).

Hedqvist told me that the situation in Xinjiang has just been updated after Fredrik Beijer, Head of Legal Affairs at the Migration board, summoned a crisis group a couple of weeks ago, in order to get a better understanding of the development in the region.

After the meeting with the crisis group – of which Hedqvist was a part – Beijer issued a ”judicial comment” on the LIFOS. The comment and a report that was published simultaneously is available in Swedish only.

Let me translate the most important part of Beijer’s judicial comment below:

On the above mentioned grounds, Head of Legal Affairs [Fredrik Beijer] makes the assessment that no deportation of Uyghurs, or other minority groups from Xinjiang, to China is to be carried out for the time being, including cases who already acquired legal force.

As Hedqvist underscores, this includes not only Uyghurs but also other minority groups, and not only deportations to Xinjiang but also other parts of China.

So what do this mean for the Uyghur family who earlier this month was risking immediate deportation to Xinjiang? In short, it means that the family will not be expelled to China, and that their new application for asylum in Sweden is more likely to be accepted than was the case before.

This development is described by Hedqvist as ”a quick decision”. It is however impossible to confirm wether it was made thanks to the attention that this case got in social media, with several medias, organisations and concerned individuals contacting the Migration Board as well as the Swedish Ministry of Foreign Affairs.

In any case, the family have avoided a grim fate, and likewise the Swedish authorities have avoided international embarrassment. A ”win-win situation”, as the Chinese Communist Party often like to say!

Videointervju med Kinas ambassadör om Gui Minhai

”The Chinese ambassador to Sweden is not making friends in that country”. Så summerar SupChina News ambassadör Gui Congyous framfart i Sverige under de senaste dagarna.

Man syftar givetvis på ambassadörens oförsonliga krav på ursäkt, kompensation och straff för poliserna som avvisade tre kinesiska turister från ett hotell i Stockholm tidigare denna månad.

Ambassadören ligger inte direkt på latsidan. Trots att han på bara ett par dagar intervjuats av såväl Aftonbladet som Expressen angående de tre turisterna, har han även haft tid att intervjuas av tidningen Journalisten angående Gui Minhai.

Journalisten lade nyss upp en artikel och en video av intervjun på sin hemsida, där ambassadören levererar en rad motsägelsefulla och på annat vis från sanningssynpunkt ytterst tveksamma svar.

Bland annat säger han att Sverige gör sig skyldiga till påverkan av Kinas juridiska självständighet genom att kräva att Gui Minhai ska släppas fri – trots att han själv under de senaste dagarna flera gånger krävt att de svenska poliser som handlat enligt svensk lag ska straffas(!)

Ambassadören vidhåller även att Gui Minhais ”erkännanden” på kinesisk tv är genuina. Med vilka argument då? Jo, dels har Gui en egen vilja. Och dels är det olagligt att tvinga folk att erkänna saker i Kina, så därför kan erkännandena alltså inte vara framtvingade!

Vidare säger ambassadören att han ”inte vill” att fallet Gui Minhai ska skapa problem i de bilaterala relationerna. Anledningen till att det ändå blir så, är enligt ambassadören att det finns ”vissa personer” i Sverige som kritiserar Kinas hantering av Gui.

Om dessa personer bara kan vara tysta och respektera det kinesiska folkets ”110 år långa kamp” för självständighet, så kommer allt blir bra igen.

Intervjun – som sannolikt inte kommer ge ambassadören särskilt många nya vänner – kan ses via Journalistens hemsida eller via Youtube nedan:

På sin hemsida publicerar Journalisten även ett par andra frågor och svar som inte finns med i videointervjun. Bland annat frågar man om det brev som Kinas ambassad skickade ut till dussintals personer med smädelser om Gui Minhai:

Vad var syftet med det brevet?

– Det är mycket enkelt. Dessa personer har blivit lurade att skriva under ett upprop som brutalt blandar sig i Kinas justitiesuveränitet. Vi kan bara inte acceptera det. Syftet med brevet är att presentera sanningen och fakta till de här personerna. Det är allt, säger ambassadör Gui Congyou.

Ambassadören håller alltså fast vid fräckheten att flera av de 45 svenskar som i juni skrev under ett upprop för Gui Minhais frihet hade blivit ”lurade” att så göra.

Tidigare under sommaren har ambassadören sagt att flera av de 45 ska ha fått sina namn på uppropet utan att ha frågats eller gett sitt medgivande.

Detta visade sig vara ytterligare en lögn, då tidningen Svensk bokhandel kontaktade Kurdo Baksi som arrangerade uppropet, och kunde bekräfta att alla som skrivit under det varit fullt medvetna.

New interview: Chinese ambassador to Sweden demands compensation and punishment after tourists evicted from Stockholm hotel

In the last couple of days, a Chinese family getting evicted from a Stockholm hotel by Swedish police have made headlines around the world a created a diplomatic row between the two countries. (See this link for videos and a detailed explanation.)

After the incident, Chinese authorities immediately contacted their Swedish counterpart to demand an apology, compensation for the family and punishment for the involved police officers.

The Swedish top prosecutor at an early stage decided to cancel the investigation against the police patrol, as there was no indication that they had been acting wrongfully. Indeed, as the videos are showing, no violence were being used, and the family were let off at a metro station which is a common place for the police to bring people that are disturbing social order in the city centre.

Nevertheless, the Chinese authorities have kept demanding apology, compensation and punishment. The Chinese embassy in Stockholm have been most vocal with those demands.

After receiving the newspaper Aftonbladet for an interview during the weekend, the ambassador also received the newspaper Expressen for an interview which was published on the embassy website just a few hours ago.

Please see the interview in full below. It’s an excellent example of the Chinese authorities trying to impose its own will on the law and justice system of a foreign country, never mind the lies and poor excuses being made in the process:

Ambassador Gui said, when I was interviewed by your colleague from the Aftonbladet yesterday, I have said all there is to be said about the incident. Now that you requested an interview with me, I have to agree to take it. First, I would like to give you an update. This morning, the police chief of the district where the brutal treatment of three Chinese tourists by Swedish police happened met with my colleagues. He confirmed to my colleagues that the three Chinese tourists did not break any Swedish law. He also said what was done by the Swedish police did not break the law either. We cannot understand such statement from the Swedish police. First, the brutal treatment of the three Chinese tourists threatened and endangered their life, safety and dignity. Does the Swedish law not respect human rights and dignity? Given that the police are there to enforce the law on behalf of the government, does the Swedish government not respect human rights and dignity either? Second, if foreign police treat Swedish tourists the same way, how will the Swedish government react? How will you react? Will the Swedish government agree with and accept it? Will the Swedish people agree with and accept it? Third, as far as we know, a similar incident happened in the southern Swedish city Borås in November 2011. The victim in that incident was a Swedish citizen, and eventually the police officer were convicted of negligence. I hope you will publish what I said to your readers.

Q: This incident took place on 2 September. Why did it take the Chinese Government two weeks to react so strongly?

Gui Congyou: We received a verbal report from the victims on 2 September. Because of technical reasons, it was on 5 September that we received a written account of the incident and contacted the hotel to inquire on the incident. On 5 September, after thoroughly understanding what happened, we informed the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs and made serious representations. China’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs also lodged serious representations to the Swedish ambassador to China in Beijing. We expected the Swedish police to promptly respond to the three Chinese tourists’ requests for a thorough investigation, apology, punishment of the involved police officers and compensation. However, nearly two weeks had passed and there was not a single word of reply from the Swedish side. It is not consistent with international practice. The three Chinese tourists were physically and mentally harmed, and they wanted the Swedish side to respond to their legitimate requests promptly. So they had to bring the incident to the media.

Q: Did you communicate with the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs and police?

Gui Congyou: As I said, after thoroughly acquiring relevant information from all sides, I immediately met with relevant senior officials from the Swedish Ministry for Foreign Affairs. Like I stressed yesterday in the interview with Aftonbladet, the life, safety and dignity of each and every Chinese citizen is precious to the Chinese Government and Embassy. From the perspective of consular protection, the incident was by no means a small issue. We hope the Swedish side would take the issue very seriously and give due reply promptly to the requests of the three Chinese victims.

When asked about the details regarding the dispute between the three Chinese tourists and the hotel, Ambassador Gui said, I have answered what you asked in my interview with Aftonbladet yesterday. Here is a full text of the interview, please refer to it.

Q: The Swedish prosecutors concluded that the police did not break the law.

Gui Congyou: In that case, I cannot but ask a question. The three tourists, including two elders, one of whom was ill and on medication, were cast at a graveyard in a desolate place after being forcefully removed from the hotel by the police. It was late at night and below 10°C, and their safety was threatened and dignity harmed. Does the Swedish Police Law allow this? Is the Swedish Police Law so inhumane and immoral? Does the Swedish law disrespect basic human rights to such an extent? !

Q: I worked in the US and China, and I know it is never a good idea to argue with local police. I have seen the video, where Mr. Zeng was very emotional and yelled “This is killing”. If people argue with police in the US, they may be arrested immediately. Would it have been a better choice for the police to arrest the Chinese tourists?

Gui Congyou: The Swedish police have confirmed that the three Chinese tourists did not break the law and the police had no right to arrest them. Of course, if they broke the law, the police should handle the case according to law. In fact, the three Chinese tourists came to Stockholm from thousands of miles away and just arrived very late at night in a place where they knew no one. Who could they turn to for help? They could’ve turned to the Embassy for help, but unfortunately they did not. If the Swedish police did not want to help them, the best choice is to contact the Embassy, but they did not do so either. Even if there were flaws or inappropriate behaviors by the Chinese tourists, that does not justify the Swedish police’s brutal treatment to them. Aren’t we supposed to respect human rights?! Aren’t we suppose to advocate human rights?!

Q: The police followed the routine. They had the right to move them away from the hotel. The tourists were put in a place with a subway station. It is nothing special and happens all the time.

Gui Congyou: As I said, the three Chinese tourists traveled thousands of miles and just arrived in Stockholm very late at night, and they knew no one here. Though there was a subway station near the place they were forcefully taken to by the Swedish police, the first thing they saw was a graveyard. How were they supposed to feel when the first thing that reached their eyes was a graveyard after enduring such horrible treatment? Even if they could find the subway station, did the subway operate so late at night? Why did the Swedish police not take them to somewhere safe? As far as I know, in the winter of Stockholm, when someone drunk lies on the street,the police is obligated to take them to somewhere warm, so that they will not get injured or die because of the freezing temperature. If the police could do that, why couldn’t they be more humane and moral with the three Chinese tourists? Let alone that the Chinese tourists were completely defenseless and could in no way constitute a threat to the police. Were the Swedish police so cruel and apathetic?

Q: We all saw the video, where Mr. Zeng lied in front of the police and shouted “This is killing”. Are there any parts wrong about his behavior?

Gui Congyou: They were forcefully expelled from the hotel. His father, almost 70 years old and ill, lied on the ground half-unconscious, and his mother was collapsing on the ground calling out for help. The family came to Sweden with great interest only to find themselves in such despair and helplessness, upon arrival in Stockholm. In such a state, how is he supposed to react? I was shown the video by the Aftonbladet journalist yesterday. But why didn’t you pay attention to the part of the video where his father lied on the ground half-unconscious?! Why didn’t you broadcast that part?

Q: Mr. Zeng said they were beaten and abused by the Swedish police, but the prosecutors concluded that the accusation had no ground and the police did nothing wrong. How do you comment on that?

Gui Congyou: I have answered this question at the beginning. Do I need to repeat it?

Q: No. Could you tell us more about the family? Where are they from in China? What were their plans in Sweden and where did they go after leaving Sweden?

Gui Congyou: For their privacy, I cannot give you information about the family without their permission. After being brutally treated by the police, they took a train back to downtown Stockholm with the help of a kind passer-by. Then they reported to the police and the Embassy. Eventually they abandoned the travel plan in Sweden and left the country with fear and anger, and continued the rest of the trip.

Q: At around 10 o’clock on 2 September, a twitter account “Swedenpolicetorturechineseelders” was registered and it tweeted pictures of the incident. Back then very few people knew about the incident. Was the account opened by Embassy staff ?

Gui Congyou: As I said, the Embassy received the verbal report of the incident from Mr. Zeng around 6 am on 2 September. We did not receive his detailed written report and pictures until the morning of 5 September.

Q: So the Embassy has nothing to do with the Twitter account?

Gui Congyou: I think I have made myself very clear.

Q: Mr. Ambassador, I believe you also have seen the huge reaction from China, especially its social media like Weibo. Are you surprised?

Gui Congyou: We are living in an age of “wemedia”, we all need to adjust to this reality.

Q: Some people say that this incident was essentially a result of cultural conflict or misunderstanding, or language barriers. It happens all over the world. Why does the Chinese Government regard it as a big deal?

Gui Congyou: Don’t you think this is a big deal? ! In the middle of the night and when the temperature was below 10℃, the Chinese tourists who traveled from far with high expectations had not only their journey ruined but their life endangered and dignity violated. Isn’t that a big deal? As I stressed to the journalist from Aftonbladet yesterday, there are nearly 1.4 billion people in China, and that the life, safety and dignity of each and every one of them is precious to the Communist Party of China and the Chinese Government. To protect the life, safety and dignity of every Chinese citizen traveling overseas is the duty of all Chinese embassies and consulates abroad.

Q: I once worked in China. If the Chinese police ask me to do something, I will follow. If Chinese tourists coming to Sweden in the future would face a dialogue with the Swedish police, what’s your advice for them?

Gui Congyou: The Chinese Government is always telling Chinese citizens traveling abroad to abide by local laws and regulations, respect local customs, and behave in a civilized manner. On the other hand, all Chinese embassies and consulates abroad follow the local security situation closely and issue timely travel alerts and warnings when the situation changes. You can see our embassy website. We have posted several travel alerts since this summer. You can refer to my interview yesterday to find out why. Frankly speaking, the relevant departments of the Swedish side have not paid due attention to the safety of Chinese tourists. Up to now, not a single case reported by Chinese tourists has been solved by the Swedish police. What do you think should be done?

Q: In fact local Swedish people may also have their properties robbed or stolen. Do you believe that for tourists, it is more dangerous to travel in Sweden than other European countries?

Gui Congyou: As you can see from the record of my interview with Aftonbladet, I answered the same question yesterday. I have also discussed the safety of tourists with other ambassadors in Sweden. Some ambassadors also said that their citizens have frequently had their belongings stolen or robbed. We hope that the Swedish government and relevant departments will attach great importance to this and take effective measures to stop further theft and robbery against foreign tourists, so as to make Sweden safer than other countries!

Q: Some Swedish people, including source from the Swedish government, believe that the Chinese Government’s handling of this incident has something to do with the case of Gui Minhai, and that this is China’s retaliation against Sweden. What is your comment ?

Gui Congyou: I saw this assumption in your report on 16 September. I want to stress once again that three Chinese tourists having been treated brutally by the Swedish police is by no means a trivial matter! Their life was threatened and their dignity hurt in the middle of the night. In this regard, we made solemn representations to the Swedish side and asked the Swedish side to respond properly as soon as possible to the reasonable demands of the Chinese tourists. Do we need yet other causes for lodging representations? ! People who made this assumption have no regard at all for the safety of Chinese tourists and human dignity! I hope they will have some respect for basic human rights! Chinese tourists have been subjected to such rude treatment and thrown into such desperation, and yet they can be so indifferent, which makes us very shocked and puzzled.

Q: On the case of Gui Minhai, China has always insisted that Sweden is interfering in China’s internal affairs. Then can we say that China is now interfering in Sweden’s internal affairs when dealing with this incident?

Gui Congyou: First of all, I have to add one more point. According to the report published by your newspaper yesterday, some people said that the possibility of China intentionally directing this incident can’t be ruled out. I just want to say it was very imaginative of them to be capable of such fabrication! We all live in reality, not in fictional detective stories!

As to the case of Gui Minhai, he committed serious crimes in China and the Chinese side dealt with his case in accordance with law. The Swedish side unreasonably demanded the release of him, which is obviously an interference in China’s judicial sovereignty with no respect for the rule of law. It is an act out of ignorance of law. The three Chinese tourists did not violate the Swedish law, but were treated brutally by the Swedish police and had their physical and mental health and dignity hurt. They hope that the Swedish side will respond as soon as possible to their reasonable demands. As an embassy, we shoulder the responsibility of providing consular protection to Chinese citizens abroad. We certainly have an obligation to speak to the Swedish side and ask for a proper reply. This is a diplomatic as well as common international practice.

Q: The Swedish prosecution doesn’t think the police have violated the law. The Swedish police also rejected claims from the Chinese tourists for apology and compensation. What will happen next?

Gui Congyou: In a word, we will continue to ask the Swedish side to thoroughly investigate the case, act in accordance with law, and respond as soon as possible to the reasonable demands of the Chinese tourists. We are doing this to safeguard the basic human rights of Chinese citizens.

Q: What if the Swedish police refused?

Gui Congyou: We urge the Swedish police to respond promptly, but do not answer any hypothetical questions.

Q: How do you see the Sweden-China relations? Sweden is the first Western country to establish diplomatic relations with China, and the bilateral relations have always been good.

Gui Congyou: The Chinese people have always kept in mind the fact that Sweden took the lead among Western countries in establishing diplomatic relations with China, and they have friendly feelings towards the Swedish people. Our task is to work with the Swedish side to maintain, develop and consolidate the friendship between the two peoples and to promote the continuous development of bilateral relations. However, China-Sweden relations must develop on a good foundation and principle, that is, equality and mutual respect. In recent years, some Swedish forces, media and people have not treated China as an equal. They keep saying that Sweden is a small country, but on every occasion and on each single matter, they always point fingers at China and dictate how China should do. They put themselves in a position to lecture others and are full of arrogance, prejudice, stereotype and ignorance against China. We hope that these forces, media and individuals in Sweden will give up their sense of superiority and treat China as an equal. Only based on this foundation and principle can China-Sweden relations develop further.

The interview can also be viewed on the website of the Chinese embassy.

Since the new ambassador Gui Congyou assumed his post in August last year, the Chinese embassy have been vocal and aggressive in its criticism towards Swedish media and civil society. I recently wrote lengthy about this for Taiwan Sentinel in the article ”Chinese Embassies are Becoming Increasingly Assertive: the Case of Sweden”.

Bild från en video på en kinesisk familj som avhystes från ett hotell i Stockholm av polis.

Details on the Chinese tourists ”brutally” handled by Swedish police

In the past few days, a case where Swedish police removed a Chinese family of three from a Stockholm hotel has made headlines around the world and created a diplomatic row between the two countries.

A lot of rumours are flying around, so I decided to try to clarify some of the most important details by summing up some reporting and information from my native Sweden.

First a brief background: The family surnamed Zeng arrived to Generator Hostel some time before midnight, despite only having a booking starting from the following day of September 2. Upon arrival, the family demanded to spend the night in the lobby, a request that the staff did not want to accommodate.

Despite being told to numerous times, the family refused to leave the lobby and installed themselves in the sofas. After a couple of hours the situation became ”threatening” according to the staff, who decided to call on police to remove the family from the lobby.

The drama increased further with the arrival of the police, who the son accused of using excessive violence against his parents. ”Excessive violence” is of course in the eye of the beholder. Anyone is free to make their own judgement based on the below videos:

The father allegedly all of a sudden turned so ill that he couldn’t walk, and was carried out from the hotel, and ”thrown on the ground”.

”Save our lives!”, the mother screams as the police and a security guard watches in disbelief.

The son repeatedly accuses the police of trying to murder his parents.

While the bottom three videos appeared to have been filmed by the son, the top one was taken by a passer-by (un)lucky enough to watch the scene.

The man gives an interview with Sweden’s biggest newspaper Aftonbladet, where he says the police didn’t look mean or violent at all.

The police tried to calm down the situation while the Chinese family just ”shouted and screamed”, the man explained to Aftonbladet. He said the son’s behaviour was particularly strange, suddenly just ”throwing himself flat on the ground”.

According to the son – whose account was published by nationalist tabloid Global Times – several more armed police then arrived at the scene, proceeding to force the family into a police car.

Inside the car, he claimed his parents were harshly beaten up by the police while they were driven to a desolate graveyard and thrown out of the car in the cold, forest like environment with animals howling all around them.

While there is indeed no video material from car ride itself, it is worth noting that the family was let off not at a graveyard but at a metro station. The name of the station is ”Skogskyrkogården”, or ”Woodland Cemetery”, which is referring to a UNESCO heritage site in the shape of an old graveyard in connection to the subway station.

The Woodland Cemetery metro station is located within walkable distance from the very center of Stockholm.

The station is located well within the city limits of Stockholm, less than six kilometers from the hotel where the family had started the quarrel a couple of hours earlier. According to chief prosecutor Mats Ericsson, the station is a common place for the police to drive people who have been disturbing the social order in the city centre.

Nevertheless, Chinese authorities were quick with demanding a public apology, as well as a punishment for the police officers and monetary compensation for the family. The demands were issued on the website of the Chinese embassy in Stockholm this weekend, allegedly after the Swedish side had not given any ”feedback” despite communication from the embassy.

Furthermore, Aftonbladet last weekend proceeded to interview Gui Congyou, the Chinese ambassador to Sweden, concerning the case. In the interview – published on the embassy’s website in English and Chinese – Gui is totally siding with the family’s version of the story.

He keeps repeating a set of ”alternative truths”. Apart from stating that the family were being ”brutally treated”, he also says several times that the family arrived just ”a few hours earlier” than their booking and that police tossed them off at a graveyard in a ”desolate place”. Here an excerpt from the interview:

Q: Hotels have to call the police when tourists refuse to leave their property. It happens frequently in Sweden.

Gui Congyou: You can continue to talk to the hotel to find out what happened there. But why were the Chinese tourists treated so brutally and tossed at a graveyard in a desolate place by the police when they did not break any Swedish law? Why has the police not informed the Chinese Embassy and not responded to our requests for a meeting? If you will interview the Swedish police, please raise my questions to them.

Q: Yesterday the Aftonbladet website posted a video shot by a witness. I would like for you to watch it and tell me what you think. (The video shows the Chinese tourists calling for help in front of the police on the street.)

Gui Congyou: Why was the Chinese tourist acting like that? His father was ill and had to bring medicine with him. The father was already half-unconscious when being brutally dragged from the hotel and his mother was collapsing on the ground. Why were the Swedish police not giving them any help? At midnight, when they had just arrived in a new place and knew no one around here, what else do you think these helpless people could do?

By coincidence, I actually stayed one night at the Generator Hostel this very summer when back in Sweden. As the time for check in is afternoon, and the family arrived before midnight, they would have missed their check-in time with about 15 hours and not ”a few”.

Also, there is a restaurant and a café belonging to the hotel just by the lobby. By buying a coffee there, the family could for sure have waited until it was time for check in. (Though this café is not mentioned in any reporting so far.)

The ambassador also spends a considerable amount of time talking about the bad security situation in Sweden. Before he was posted here, Gui Congoyu says, he had learned how Sweden was a very safe place where one did not even had to lock the door. Though after having lived here for a year, the ambassador had now revalued his assessment of Sweden as a safe country.

According to Gui Congyou, on average two Chinese tourists get robbed on their wallets or passports every day in Sweden. The ambassador had also noted how law and order and organised crime was a frequent topic of debate during the recent election campaign. In all, this have led to the embassy issuing no less than three warnings and alerts only during the last month, for Chinese tourists visiting Sweden.

When asked if ”this kind of incidents” is not a common problem in a majority of the world’s big cities, the ambassador replies that this would never happen in China(!)

However, another potential explanation for the strong reaction from the Chinese authorities have been discussed in Swedish media. An anonymous source within the Swedish Government Offices, as well as a political scientist, have connected the reaction to the case of Gui Minhai.

In interviews with Aftonbladet, they both express their belief that this case would have passed by unnoticed hand it not been for the continuous demands from Swedish authorities and media to release Gui Minhai, the publisher who was been locked up in China without a trial for almost three months.

This is of course only subject of speculation, and the Chinese ambassador angrily denies any connection to Gui Minhai in his interview with Aftonbladet.

The Chinese embassy’s demand for an apology, compensation and punishment towards the police still stands.

Today, the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs also chipped in by during a press briefing demanding Sweden ”take China’s concerns seriously” and ”take practical measures” to secure the safety of Chinese tourists.

It is however very likely that the Chinese authorities will disappointed in this regard.

Top prosecutor Mats Ericsson today told Aftonbladet that the investigation towards the involved police patrol was cancelled already September 7, since there was no indication that the police had been acting wrongfully.

”This is normal procedure when people are disturbing the social order”, Ericsson says to Aftonbladet, adding that the family had no right to be at the hotel and that the police were acting according to Swedish law.

Alas, most likely no apology will be issued, despite the fact that the Chinese ambassador multiple times has accused the police for breaking the law, and demanding that the Swedish authorities should handle the case ”in accordance with the law”.

This statement is of course a bit ironic, as the Chinese authorities when talking about Gui Minhai never miss a chance to point out that every individual including foreigners are equal before the law in China. And the case with the Chinese family was clearly handled according to Swedish law.

At any rate, the family left Sweden already the following morning, but they seem to be neither in bad condition nor in bad spirits. On Chinese social media, photos have been circulating of the family continuing their Europe trip:

The reactions on Chinese social media have been strong but varied. While many netizens are showing sympathy for the family and calling for a boycott of Sweden, there are also those expressing their grief that the police just didn’t go ahead and bury the family at the graveyard while at it.

See a recollection of social media comments via What’s on Weibo.

Article in Swedish here.

Nytt videomaterial och intervju med Kinas ambassdör om familjen som polis avlägsnade från hotell i Stockholm

Fallet med den kinesiska familj som avlägsnades av polis från Generator Hostel i Stockholm tidigare denna månad har fått oanade proportioner. Flera internationella medier har uppmärksammat fallet och den diplomatiska kris som nu följer.

Jag har tidigare här på InBeijing postat tre videos i ett inlägg som nu fått över 15 000 träffar. Sedan dess har ytterligare videomaterial dykt upp. Detta bisarra klipp, som filmades av en förbipasserande, summerar situationen väldigt väl:

Vilket tydligt kan ses så handlar det inte om övervåld – eller ens om något våld alls – från polisens sida. Det är istället familjen som gapar och skriker, och sonen som slänger sig raklång på marken och teatergråter i ett pinsamt försök att senare kunna anklaga polispatrullen för omänsklighet.

Personen som filmade dessa klipp berättar dessutom om situationen för Aftonbladet i artikeln ”Hotellbråket fångades på video: ’Poliserna såg inte alls elaka ut’”.

Där säger mannen att poliserna försökte lugna ner situationen, men att kineserna ”bara gapade och skrek”. Sonen beskrivs som ”konstig” med anledning av att han ”kastade sig rakt ut” på marken.

Aftonbladet har även uppsökt Kinas ambassad och intervjuat den kinesiska ambassadören, som helt tar familjens parti och inte skräder med orden. (Läs hela intervjun på engelska eller kinesiska via ambassadens hemsida.)

Ambassadörens svar är ganska repetitiva. Han återger flera gånger hur Kina respekterar och skyddar sina medborgares rättigheter, samt att polisen handlat på ett vis som man från kinesiskt håll inte kan acceptera.

Svaren innehåller – föga förvånande – en rad felaktigheter och överdrifter. Framför allt beskyller ambassadören polisen för att ha ”dumpat familjen på en avlägsen kyrkogård”.

Vidare hävdar ambassadören att hotellpersonalen ljuger. Han menar att familjen anlände till hotellet ”bara några timmar” innan incheckning, trots att de i själva verket anlände innan midnatt dagen före, alltså cirka 15 timmar innan det var dags att checka in.

Ambassadören försöker bevisa sin teori genom att det var mörkt ute när bilder och video togs. (Det är oklart vad som är relevant i denna förklaring, eftersom detta ju snarare visar att familjen i själva verket var på hotellet långt tidigare än vad ambassadören hävdar.)

Ambassadören ägnar också en stor del av intervjun till att fördöma säkerhetsläget i Sverige. Han berättar hur han innan sin postering i Stockholm lärt sig att Sverige är ett väldigt säkert land, men att han nu fått omvärdera sin uppfattning. Han hänvisar bland annat till hur orolighet kring lag och ordning och organiserad brottslighet diskuterades frekvent under valrörelsen.

Vidare säger ambassadören att två kinesiska turister i genomsnitt råkar ut för stölder och rån i Sverige varje dag. Även detta säga ligga bakom de varningar som ambassaden utfärdat till kinesiska turister som planerar besöka Sverige.

Aftonbladet intervjuar Kinas ambassadör om händelsen.

I en nedkortad version av intervjun på Aftonbladet, så beskyller ambassadören vidare de personer som kopplat samman händelsen med Gui Minhai för att inte basera sina uttalanden på fakta, utan på ”gissningar” och andra påhitt som används för att attackera Kina.

Av allt att döma så kvarstår ambassadens krav på en offentlig ursäkt samt att poliserna ska straffas och familjen kompenseras. Det är dock en stor risk att ambassadören kommer bli besviken.

För i Aftonbladet uppger chefsåklagare Mats Ericsson i dag att man redan 7 september lade ner utredningen mot polispatrullen, eftersom de inte ansetts ha begått något fel:

Måndagen den 3 september polisanmälde sonen i den kinesiska familjen polisens hantering av ärendet och på fredagen den 7 september lades utredningen ner av Chefsåklagare Mats Ericsson på Särskilda åklagarkammaren som hanterar polismål.

– De inleddes aldrig någon förundersökning eftersom bedömningen var att det som hände inte var något brott från polisens sida. Polisen har rätt enligt polislagen att avlägsna någon från en plats till en annan och det är en oerhört vanlig och standardmässig polisprocedur att göra det och så skedde i det här fall, säger Mats Ericsson.

I det här fallet körde polispatrullen familjen till Skogskyrkogårdens tunnelbanestation som ligger 7 kilometer från det aktuella hotellet.

Familjen har alltså blivit avsläppta vid en tunnelbanestation och inte på en avlägsen kyrkogård. Ericsson understryker vidare att detta är en vanlig plats att avlägsna personer på som stört den allmänna ordningen.

Det är alltså osannolikt med vare sig ursäkt, kompensation eller straff mot de inblandade poliserna.

För övrigt verkar turisterna inte särskilt illa däran, långt ifrån de allvarliga personskador som ambassadören påstår att svensk polis orsakat dem. En läsare skickade mig följande bild från kinesiska sociala medier, föreställandes familjens fortsatta semester i Europa:

För den som är intresserad av hur diskursen går på kinesiska sociala medier, rekommenderas artikeln ”’This is Swedish Police!’ – Sweden under Fire in China for ’Brutal Abuse’ of Chinese Tourists” av What’s on Weibo.

Gui Minhai orsaken att Kina varnar turister för Sverige och kräver ursäkt för polisinsats mot kinesisk familj?

Under gårdagen postade jag i går tre videos på den kinesiska familj som i början av september avvisades från ett hotell av svensk polis. Inlägget har dragit stor uppmärksamhet med över 10 000 läsare.

I ett inlägg med rubriken ”Kina varnar turister för att besöka Sverige efter påstått polisvåld mot kinesisk familj” skriver jag närmare om fallet. Familjen i fråga anlände sent på kvällen till Generator Hostel i Stockholm med bokning först nästa dag, och krävde att få övernatta i lobbyn.

När hotellpersonalen inte gick med på detta så vägrade familjen ändå att lämna lobbyn. Personalen beskriver sedan hur situationen blev hotfull, varpå polis och vakter tillkallades för att förvisa dem.

Enligt en artikel i statliga tidningen Global Times använde sig polisen av kraftigt övervåld; den sjuka pappan ”kastades” ner på marken, fler poliser ”med vapen” tillkallades och polisen sägs ha misshandlat familjen under bilfärden ut till Skogskyrkogården där de sedan dumpades.

De videos som jag postade under gårdagen ger en indikation om att så inte skett. Istället är det familjen som beter sig extremt illa: gapar och skriker och filmar och ber för sina liv medan polis och vakter förvånat ser på.

Men det spelar ingen roll. Fallet har ändå utvecklats till en diplomatisk kris, där Kinas ambassad och myndigheter vill se såväl en ursäkt som en förklaring och kompensation till familjen. Tillsvidare har Kinas ambassad och utrikesministerium utfärdat en säkerhetsvarning för kinesiska turister som planerar besöka Sverige.

I gårdagens text spekulerade jag i huruvida varningen och kraven på en ursäkt kunde vara relaterat till svenska myndigheters och mediers fortsatta krav på att Gui Minhai ska släppas fri:

Försöker man kräva Sverige på en ursäkt med en formulering gällande brist på respekt för mänskliga rättigheter, med anledning av allt prat om mänskliga rättigheter kring fallet Gui Minhai? Det är också värt att notera hur Global times publicerar artikeln under ”Diplomati”, snarare än ”Turism” eller ”Samhälle”.

Det visar sig nu mycket riktigt att så kan vara fallet. Aftonbladet citerade under gårdagen en anonym regeringskälla i artikeln ”Källa i regeringskansliet: Därför angrips vi av Kina”:

En källa i svenska regeringskansliet, som givet frågans känslighet inte kan citeras med namn, uppger för Aftonbladet att man uppfattar uppståndelsen kring händelsen som underblåst av statliga aktörer i Kina.

Källan uppger att man direkt kopplar händelsen till de svenska ansträngningarna med att få den svenska bokförläggaren Gui Minhai, som sitter fängslad i Kina, frisläppt.
– Det finns saker som talar för att hela den här frågan, på vilket sätt den har förstorats, har att göra med någon underliggande faktor och det handlar ju om, tror vi, att man stör sig på att vi fortsätter kräva att Gui Minhai ska friges, säger källan i regeringskansliet.

Andra har spekulerat i huruvida händelsen hänger ihop med att Dalai lama tidigare denna vecka besökte Sverige. Personligen tror jag inte mycket på denna teori, då det inte var svenska myndigheter utan biståndsorganisationen Individuell människohjälp som bjudit in honom.

Det är i sammanhanget mycket viktigt att förstå att kinesiska myndigheter ofta använder kinesiska turister som ett slags diplomatiskt vapen. Om bråk uppstår med annat land har Kina vid flera tillfällen uppmanat eller försvårat för sina egna invånare att resa dit, vilket leder till minskade turistintäkter för vederbörande land.

Ett tydligt nyligen inträffat exempel på detta är Sydkorea, där antalet turister från Kina halverades i fjol jämfört med 2016, efter att man låtit USA bygga ett missilförvar på koreansk mark. Enigt Bank of Korea skalade det minskade antalet turister av 0,4 procent från landets BNP.

Sverige har på senare år satsat stort på att öka antalet turister från Kina, så rimligtvis ser kinesiska myndigheter detta som en punkt vilken går att angripa.

Fallet har fått stor uppmärksamhet inte bara i Sverige utan också internationellt.

Av den svenska rapporteringen märks bland annat ett fem och ett halv minuters långt inslag i TV4 Nyheterna under gårdagen. Det är värt att uppmärksamma inte bara för att det är ett ovanligt långt nyhetsinslag, utan även för den vinkel som kanalen valde.

I inslaget så ifrågasätts den kinesiska familjens version och beteende knappt. Istället återger man informationen i Global Times artikel, och låter sedan en presstalesman vid Utrikesdepartementet stå till svars för hur Sverige nu ska hantera händelsen.

Svensk media borde istället uppmärksamma de lögner och den felaktiga version av texten som återges från kinesiskt håll, samt det orimliga kravet på en ursäkt och kompensation till familjen. Det är livsfarligt att backa och vika ner sig för denna kravställning.

Bild från en video på en kinesisk familj som avhystes från ett hotell i Stockholm av polis.

VIDEO: Svensk polis bär ut kinesisk familj från hotell

Tidigare i dag skrev jag inlägget ”Kina varnar turister för att besöka Sverige efter påstått polisvåld mot kinesisk familj”, om hur Kinas ambassad utfärdat en varning till kinesiska turister som planerar besöka Sverige.

Anledningen till detta var en incident som bland annat beskrivs i statliga tidningen Global Times, gällande en familj som anlänt till sitt hotell i Stockholm innan incheckning.

Enligt Global Times hade sonen i familjen frågat om de mot betalning kunde vänta i lobbyn tills rummet blev redo. Då hade den oresonliga personalen genast ringt polisen, som kommit dit och misshandlat familjen och sedan dumpat dem vid en kyrkogård.

En annan version av historien har nu kommit fram, och jag har även fått tag på videos som cirkulerar på Kinas internet och visar polisens påstådda ”mycket våldsamma” hantering av familjen.

I hopp om att spara pengar, hade familjen bokat ett rum med incheckning eftermiddagen 2 september, trots att de anlände till Stockholm mitt i natten till samma dag. De hade sedan krävt att få övernatta i lobbyn tills nästa eftermiddag.

När personalen på Generator Hostel inte ville ha en familj sovandes i lobbyn över natten, vägrade de dock ändå att flytta på sig. Polis tillkallades, och nedan kan ni se scenerna som följde:

Pappan, som sades vara sjuk, bars ut av polisen då han vägrade gå själv, men ”kastades” verkligen inte ner på marken. Sonen som filmar menar att polisen försöker döda pappan.

”Rädd våra liv”, bönfaller mamman inför konfunderade poliser och vakter.

Gråt och tandagnisslan fortsätter, liksom beskyllningar mot polisen för att de försöker ”döda” pappan.

Nu kräver alltså Kinas ambassad och utrikesministerium att Sverige ber om ursäkt(!) för vad som skett. Vilket tydligt framgår av scenerna ovan, så handlar det inte om något övervåld på det vis som Global Times beskrev i sin artikel.

På grund av familjens ovilja att boka rum en extra dag för att spara pengar – trots att pappan var sjuk – har Kina nu alltså dessutom utfärdat en varning för kinesiska turister att besöka Sverige.

Scenerna ovan kan te sig ytterst märkliga för gemene man. Men för den som följt kinesiska turisters beteenden i utlandet, är detta inte oväntat. De har ett oöverträffat track record om att själva bete sig illa och sedan kräva olika sorters ursäkter och kompensation – ofta uppbackade av Kinas myndigheter.

För den som vill ha ett stickprov på detta, vänligen se artikeln ”Shanghaiist’s top 10 most embarrassing Chinese tourists of 2017”.

Kina varnar turister för att besöka Sverige efter påstått polisvåld mot kinesisk familj

(Källa bild ovan: Google Images)

OBS: Sedan jag först skrev denna text har jag fått fram videomaterial på händelsen. Se tre stycken videos i mitt inlägg ”VIDEO: Svensk polis bär ut kinesisk familj från hotell”.

Under gårdagen utfärdade Kinas ambassad en varning till alla kineser som planerar att besöka Sverige. I ett meddelande på ambassadens hemsida – som också återges av Kinas utrikesministerium – uppges att kinesiska turister på sistone inte bara råkat ut för stölder och personrån, utan även hanterats ”mycket våldsamt” av svenska tjänstemän.

Vad handlar nu detta om? Global Times, som ges ut av partitidningen Folkets Dagblad, publicerade under gårdagen artikeln ”Chinese Embassy in Sweden issues safety alert following tourists’ ’nightmare’ incident by local police”, där en incident som ska ha ägt rum 2 september skildras.

Artikeln berättar om en kinesisk familj som anlände till sitt hotell i Stockholm innan tiden för incheckning. Enligt Global Times ska sonen – som endast uppger sitt efternamn Zeng – ha frågat personalen om han och hans föräldrar kunde slå sig ner och vänta i lobbyn mot en extra avgift.

Då bröt helvetet loss. Personalen ringde polisen, som sedan påstås ha dragit ut familjen och kastat ner den sjuka pappan mitt på gatan. Fler beväpnade poliser ska sedan ha anlänt för att ta hand om familjen:

Zeng said that soon, more police officers with guns arrived in two cars. They started to disperse the crowed and tried to snatch the cell phone from Zeng. Later, Zeng and his family were taken away in a police car. While they were in the police car, the police also allegedly beat Zeng’s parents.

After being loaded into the police car, Zeng said the police officers asked if they were refugees and if they meant to use violence. Zeng said the police threatened to abandon them in the woods to stay with the animals.

After about an hour of driving, Zeng said the police stopped the car and ejected them from the vehicle at a graveyard in the middle of the night.

Enligt Zengs vittnesmål ska familjen sedan efter en halvtimme fått skjuts av en förbipasserande bil. De beslutade sig sedan för att kontakta den kinesiska ambassaden i Stockholm och genast lämna landet. Familjen kräver nu en förklaring, en ursäkt samt kompensation för vad som inträffat.

Intressant nog i artikelns slut uttrycker Zeng det bisarra i att detta händer i ett ”modernt land”, som ”hela tiden talar om mänskliga rättigheter”. Han citeras även säga att Kinas utrikesministerium och ambassad ser allvarligt på vad som inträffat, men att Sverige ännu inte har ”gett något svar” på vad som skett.

Artikeln väcker en rad frågetecken. Till att börja med bilderna, som är tagna i mörker, vilket indikerar att familjen anlänt till hotellet på kvällen eller natten innan incheckning och hållit låda. (Det blir fortfarande ljust innan klockan 06 i Stockholm.)

Polis bär ut den kinesiska familjen från hotellet. Bild från Global Times.

Vidare har jag lokaliserat vilket hotell det handlar om, och som av en slump så bodde jag faktiskt där själv en natt i somras. Eftersom jag själv också anlände innan incheckning, så vet jag att det inte är några problem att vänta gratis i lobbyn, som även innehåller kafé och restaurang. Varför skulle personalen ha ringt polisen istället för att uppmana familjen att köpa en kaffe?

Det vore dock överraskande om ambassaden har hittat på fallet helt från det blå. Sannolikt har bråk uppstått mellan familjen och personalen, vilket lett till att polis tillkallats för att sonen bettet sig illa. Jag kommer i dag kontakta såväl hotellet som svenska Utrikesdepartementet för att försöka få klarhet i saken.

Att mänskliga rättigheter blandas in i artikeln, kan vidare vara en pik mot svenska myndigheter gällande fallet Gui Minhai. Särskilt som Sverige nu krävs på en ursäkt för det inträffade.

Kinesiska turister har blivit en allt viktigare inkomstkälla för många länder. De senaste åren har myndigheterna heller inte tvekat att använda detta som vapen i diplomatiska dispyter. Om ett land inte ber om ursäkt eller fogar sig efter Kinas politiska vilja, hotar myndigheterna med att minska antalet turister från Kina.

Är det något liknande vi ser här? Försöker man kräva Sverige på en ursäkt med en formulering gällande brist på respekt för mänskliga rättigheter, med anledning av allt prat om mänskliga rättigheter kring fallet Gui Minhai? Det är också värt att notera hur Global times publicerar artikeln under ”Diplomati”, snarare än ”Turism” eller ”Samhälle”.

Jag kommer uppdatera med mer information på InBeijing så fort jag fått svar från hotell och/eller Utrikesdepartement.

Det inträffade har ännu inte fått någon uppmärksamhet i svensk- eller engelskspråkig media, förutom Global Times. Den kinesiska nyhetssidan Guancha uppmärksammar dock att detta är tredje gången på bara en månad som Kinas ambassad i Stockholm utfärdar varningar till turister att besöka Sverige.

En varning kom i mitten av augusti med anledning av de omfattande bilbränder som inträffade på olika platser i landet. Ytterligare en varning kom i slutet av samma månad, med anledning av demonstrationer av Nordiska motståndsrörelsen samt planerade motdemonstrationer.

New lawyer and pending inhibition: Latest on the Uyghur family risking deportation from Sweden

Last week, I wrote a text with the headline ”Sweden about to deport a Uyghur family to Xinjiang”, about Abdakir, his pregnant wife and their two children. After having been denied asylum to Sweden, they risk being deported back to China where harsh punishment most certainly awaits, given the current situation for Uyghurs in the Xinjiang region.

The text drew a lot of interest from media, civil society, academics and other readers. While happy for the attention brought to Abdakir’s case, I must also express my disappointment on the fact that no English or Chinese language media (bar Turkistan Times) have yet written about the case, despite the fact that a handful of journalists contacted me as well as Abdakir and his lawyer.

My disappointment is first and foremost based on the fact that Abdakir’s past and current lawyer both underscored how international media attention could be helpful in this case, as it will increase the risk for repression would the family to return to Xinjiang, which in turn is likely to affect the asylum application in a positive way.

I write ”past and current lawyer”, because since my last text Abdakir and his family is now represented by a new lawyer. She has filed a request for a new asylum application for the family – and already during next week a vital decision will be taken by the Swedish Migration Board. Let me try to explain..

As I wrote last week, Abdakir spent about a year hiding in Germany, after having been denied asylum by the Swedish Migration Court in April 2017. The reason that the family returned to Sweden in July this year, was simply that they were detected by German authorities who according to the Dublin Regulation sent them back to the EU country were the asylum application was first done.

The rejected asylum claim is still valid, and hence the family are now in theory upholding themselves illegally on Swedish soil. Nevertheless, they have been allowed to stay in a temporary residence administrated by Gävle Municipality, some 170 kilometer of Stockholm.

Why is this? Not being an asylum expert by any means myself, the family’s current lawyer had to explain this legal limbo situation for me several times.

Graphics used in the new extensive report from Human Rights Watch mentioned below. It depicts one of the camps for political reeducation, where Abdakir and his family risk ending up would Swedish authorities deported them to Xinjiang.

In fact, after an asylum application is denied, it is very rare that the deportation is carried out by force. Rather, what usually happens, is that the person(s) being denied a visa is expected to leave on their own, especially since the authorities will stop providing the person housing, food and other benefits enjoyed during the asylum process.

(This is indeed the situation not only in Sweden; Deutsche Welle explains the mechanisms closer in the article ”Why rejected asylum seekers are seldom deported”.)

In the case of Abdakir – his new lawyer explains – it is likely that the family has been allowed to stay in the temporary Gävle Residence out of ”kindness” from someone working within the government. This kindness will not last forever – as I pointed out last time, Abdakir told me his family was going to be kicked out into the streets already this week, would they not provide proof that they have visited the Chinese embassy to start arranging for the trip back to Xinjiang.

Now, the situation has changed. After having been denied asylum by the Swedish Migration Board (2016) and the Swedish Migration Court (2017), Abdakir was recently recommended by another Uyghur to contact the lawyer Marie Källbom-Lindgren. She has worked with similar cases in the past, and on a couple of occasions represented Uyghurs who won the right to asylum in Sweden.

Källbom-Lindgren expressed to me her hopes for a new, successful asylum process for Abdakir, given that the repression of Uyghurs in Xinjiang have increased remarkably – or at least so the international community’s knowledge of this repression – since the family was rejected asylum last time. But she also points out the fact that this rejection already now is putting the family in immediate danger of deportation.

Källbom-Lindgren yesterday (Thursday) filed a request for a new asylum application and, of most immediate importance, inhibition. The term inhibition means that, if accepted, Abdakir and his family will be allowed to legally stay in temporary residence as the new asylum application is being handled.

Decision about inhibition is expected to be taken next week, and this decision in vital.

Would inhibition be denied, the family will be on Swedish soil illegally and risk not only being forced to live on the streets, but also to be put in custody while awaiting deportation. This is not a common measure, Källbom-Lindgren explains, but could be taken given the fact that the family earlier was hiding in Germany for a year, and hence would naturally be suspected for not planning to leave the country voluntarily this time either.

Also, would the inhibition be denied, the family would lose their legal right to a lawyer, and whoever wanted to continue to drive their case have to be ready to do so pro bono.

The law regarding all this is neither easy, nor does it make much sense. Would the inhibition be denied, the new asylum application would go ahead nevertheless. Källbom-Lindgren can’t really say how long time this new application would take, but on average it demands ”a couple of months”.

During this time, would the inhibition be denied, the family’s only hope is to find a solution to stay in Sweden illegally during the processing time.

To sum up the situation: Most important right now is to convince the Migration Board that the conditions in Xinjiang have changed to the extent that Abdakir and his family would be in danger of persecution if they have to return.

To convince the Migration Board, Källbom-Lindgren have already turned in some documents when applying for inhibition. More documents, testimonies and proofs can and will also be handed over to the Migration Board at a later point during the process. Materials which Källbom-Lindgren is now collecting to build a case for the new asylum application – but the application for inhibition had to be done as fast as possible.

The good news is, since my last text, the Swedish Migration Board have adopted the new report ‘Eradicating Ideological Viruses’: China’s Campaign of Repression Against Xinjiang’s Muslims that Human Rights Watch published earlier this week, to its database of ”country facts” which is used to determine the security situation in countries and regions throughout the world.

As I mentioned last time, this database have not been updated for a long time concerning the situation in Xinjiang, as there are relatively few refugees applying for asylum in Sweden from China, compared to countries in the Middle East and North Africa.

However, both the current and the past lawyer of Abdakir points out that this report by no means constitutes a guarantee for Uyghurs applying for asylum in Sweden. The devil is in the details. In the of the report, Human Rights Watch is issuing the following ”recommendations” to ”concerned governments”:

Do not forcibly return ethnic Uyghurs, Kazakhs, or other Turkic Muslims to China without providing a full and fair individualized examination of their risk of being persecuted, tortured, or ill-treated in China;

(…)

Expedite asylum claims to Turkic Muslims at risk of being forcibly returned to China;

The wording ”individualized examination” and ”expedite” leaves room for interpretation. Indeed, the Migration Board could claim that an individual examination have already been done. There is a history within the Migration Board of not overturning decision already been made, perhaps to uphold the ”honor” of colleagues behind those decisions.

In my last text, the shortened name form ”Abdakir” was used as he hesitated to present his full name. Now, he have decided to use his own name in media interviews, as further attention to his case according to the lawyers could be beneficial for his case, as the risk for repression increases once the identity of Uyghurs speaking to media is exposed.

The risk of Abdakir and his family being deported from Sweden is by no means averted. It could happen already next week, would the application for inhibition be denied and the authorities detain the family while awaiting for the deportation to be prepared.

It could also happen in couple of months, even if the inhibition is accepted, if the asylum application itself gets turned down again.

Marie Källbom-Lindgren have got a proxy from Abdakir to speak to media and civil society about his case. Anyone who would like to get in touch with the new lawyer, please send an e-mail to marie@klaralex.se.

To get in touch with Abdakir, please mail me first at jojje@inbeijing.se

Längsta rapporten hittills om inlåsningen av en miljon muslimer i Xinjiang

Rapporterna om lägersystemet för ”politisk omskolning” för muslimer i västra Kina duggar nu allt tätare. Som jag skrivit tidigare så sitter omkring en miljon muslimer i provinsen Xinjiang nu i dessa politiska fångläger, dit de tagits utan någon som helst föregående juridisk process.

Under gårdagen släppte Human Rights Watch den längsta rapporten hittills om situationen i Xinjiang, i form av en 117 sidor lång rapport vid namn “‘Eradicating Ideological Viruses’: China’s Campaign of Repression Against Xinjiang’s Muslims”.

Rapporten innehåller intervjuer med hela 58 personer som tidigare bott i Xinjiang. Av dessa har fem stycken tidigare suttit i läger för politisk omskolning, och 38 personer har släktingar som hamnat där. Nitton av de intervjuade personerna har flyttat från Xinjiang under de senaste arton månaderna.

Till rapporten hör också en video, inklusive klipp från några av de genomförda intervjuerna:

Rapporten finns att tillgå i sin helhet gratis via nätet, och sammanfattas även av Human Rights Watch i en kortare text för den som inte orkar ta sig genom hela luntan.

Sammanfattningen innehåller också några utvalda vittnesmål som förekommer i rapporten:

Nobody can move because they watch you through the video cameras, and after a while a voice came from the speakers telling you that now you can relax for a few minutes. That voice also tells you off for moving…we were watched, even in the toilet. In political education camp, we were always under stress.

–Rustam, a former detainee who spent months in political education camps, May 2018

I resisted their measures…They put me in a small solitary confinement cell…In a space of about 2×2 meters I was not given any food or drink, my hands were handcuffed in the back, and I had to stand for 24 hours without sleep.

–Nur, a former detainee in a political education camp, March 2018

Tidigare i veckan skrev jag här på InBeijing om en uigurisk familj om fyra som håller på att utvisas från Sverige till Xinjiang, där fångläger eller värre med största sannolikhet väntar dem.

Passande nog så avslutar Human Rights Watch sin rapport med en rad rekommendationer, bland annat till utländska regeringar gällande asylsökande uigurer. Bland dessa märks:

* Do not forcibly return ethnic Uyghurs, Kazakhs, or other Turkic Muslims to China without providing a full and fair individualized examination of their risk of being persecuted, tortured, or ill-treated in China;

(…)

* Expedite asylum claims to Turkic Muslims at risk of being forcibly returned to China;

Human Rights Watch uppmanar alltså myndigheter världen över att inte utvisa uigurer till Kina, samt att underlätta för deras asylansökningar. Med andra ord precis tvärtemot hur svenska myndigheter agerar mot denna familj.

InBeijing kommer givetvis följa utvecklingen av detta fall.

Vidare uppmärksammades situationen i Xinjiang även i New York Times under gårdagen, där artikeln ”China Is Detaining Muslims in Vast Numbers. The Goal: ‘Transformation.’” hamnade på papperstidningens framsida.

Även i denna långa artikeln finns vittnesmål från tidigare lägerfångar, bland annat:

Nearly every morning, Mr. Muhemet recalled, he and dozens of others — college graduates, businessmen, farmers — were told to run around an assembly ground. Impatient guards sometimes slapped and shoved the older, slower inmates, he said.

Then they were made to sing rousing patriotic hymns in Chinese, such as “Without the Communist Party, There Would Be No New China.” Those who could not remember the words were denied breakfast, and they all learned the words quickly.

Likheterna med det lägersystem som växte fram i Centraleuropa under 1930-talet blir alltmer slående. Reaktionerna från omvärlden är dock långtifrån lika starka.

På engelska om hur Kinas ambassad i Stockholm smutskastar och attackerar svenskar

Ni som läser InBeijing regelbundet är redan medvetna om hur Kinas ambassad i Sverige har trappat upp sitt propagandaarbete sedan Gui Congyou blev ambassadör i augusti i fjol.

Bland annat ambassadören hotat svenska regeringen i Sveriges Radio, attackerat mig och andra medier i flera uttalanden, samt ljugit om allt från pressfrihet till Gui Minhai i flera intervjuer med svenska media.

Allt detta har uppmärksammats av stora svenska medier som Expressen och Sveriges Radio. Men väldigt lite har skrivits på engelska om den kinesiska ambassadens nya, offensiva taktik i Sverige.

I syfte att sprida budskapet – och eventuellt även få respons huruvida denna taktik även gäller kinesiska ambassader och konsulat i andra länder – så har jag nu skrivit en lång text på engelska om den kinesiska ambassadens förehavanden under det senaste året.

Texten publicerades på Taiwan Sentinel under gårdagen och har redan fått stor spridning. Där finns bland annat en beskrivning om den kinesiska ambassadörens bakgrund:

The career of Gui Congyou began in 1991 at the Central Policy Research Office, an institution within the Central Committee of the CCP responsible for drafting its ideology and political theories.

During the post-Tiananmen years, the work of this institution was deemed crucial for the survival of the party. One of Gui’s contributions was work on the collapse of communism in former Yugoslavia. His career kept a clear focus on Eastern Europe, Central Asia, and in particular Russia, working at the Chinese embassy in Moscow for over a decade. In 2014, Gui defended Russia’s annexation of Crimea, explaining that while China opposes independence referendums, “this doesn’t apply to Crimea.”

Just after taking up his post as ambassador to Sweden in August 2017, Gui Congyou told an interview with Chinese language media that he had never visited Sweden before, and never had any contact with so-called “Swedish friends” before his appointment. Rather than someone with experience or knowledge about Western Europe, Gui is better described as an anti-democratic political theoretician and an old-school party bureaucrat. What might have been the reasons behind his posting in Stockholm?

Jag skriver om också om den intensiva smutskastningskampanj som Kinas ambassad under de senaste månaderna drivit mot Gui Minhai:

The response was swift. The Chinese embassy sent mail, posts, SMS, and even made phone calls to the signatories, as well as to other journalists and people who were writing about or were otherwise related to the case. Over two thirds of the signatories have confirmed they received several documents by mail — nothing short of a dossier by post — containing information about the alleged criminal activities of Gui Minhai and his flawed personality.

According to this material, during his time in Sweden Gui Minhai had established a “fake school,” the Gothenburg International Institute (GII), which enrolled over 100 students from China to cheat them of their money. The school, the said alleged, had falsely portrayed itself as an arm of Gothenburg University (GU), offering fake degrees without the knowledge of the university. As a result, the Chinese students trapped in financial hardships had to steal or prostitute themselves, with two of them eventually committing suicide due to the situation Gui Minhai had put them in. When the scandal was exposed, the embassy said, Gui Minhai fled Sweden to escape the law.

Denna kampanj är också en av huvudpunkterna i den nya bok jag kommer lansera på bokmässan i Göteborg sista helgen i september.

I syfte att utreda ambassadens smädelser mot Gui Minhai har jag intervjuat flera personer som arbetade med Gui och stod honom nära under tiden i Göteborg, bland annat de tre tidigare professorer vid GII som etablerade institutet och under kort tid anställde Gui som vd.

En del av resultaten och svaren står att läsa i artikeln i Taiwan Sentinel. Där finns också flera exempel på hur ambassadörens arrogans snarast har gett motsatt effekt och på många vis skapat en irritation som lett till ännu större uppmärksamhet kring Gui Minhai i Sverige.

Om du har följt den kinesiska ambassadens beteende under det senaste året, och velat berätta om detta för bekanta som inte läser svenska, kan det vara en idé att dela denna artikel!

Sweden about to deport a Uyghur family to Xinjiang

A Uyghur family of four have been denied asylum to Sweden, and is now about to be deported to Xinjiang. The ruling is due to a lack of knowledge about the situation in China among the staff behind the decision. The family will be forced to live on the street from next week – or visit the Chinese embassy in Stockholm.

When the neighbourhood that Abdikir* was living in was about to be torn down in early 2015, its residents were unhappy with the conditions and the compensation on offer. Many of the older people in this northern Xinjiang town didn’t speak mandarin Chinese well, so Abdikir took the case to local authorities, and then to authorities in the provincial capital of Urumqi, on the behalf of the entire neighbourhood.

This was not appreciated. Suddenly a day in March, the police arrived to Abdikir’s home and took him away to a police station. There, he was beaten up and tortured and threatened into making a confession and signing a statement, saying that he had nothing whatsoever against the fact that his neighbourhood was going to be demolished.

Abdikir is not sure of the reason why he was then taken to a hospital. Perhaps the police wanted to stitch him up before appearing in public with the statement? What he is sure of though is that he got help to escape from the hospital, and was taken to a car where his family was waiting. Together with his wife and his four year old daughter, the car drove Abdikir to the airport where his departure to Europe had already been arranged.

In May 2015, Abdikir and his family started the process of seeking asylum in Sweden, the Scandinavian country that have been accepting more refugees per capita than any other European nation during the last handful of years. Indeed, then Prime Minister Fredrik Reinfeldt in a famous speech during the summer of 2014 pleaded to the Swedish people to ”open your hearts” in order to help people seeking protection from all parts of the world.

In 2012, Sweden drew international criticism after becoming the first Western democracy to deport two Uyghurs back to China. Not surprisingly, the two were never seen or heard from again, which made Sweden impose a temporarily halt on the deportation of Uyghurs to China. According to the Uyghur Educational Association in Stockholm, not a single Uyghur have since been deported from Sweden.

The Swedish Migration Board did not believe the story of Abdikir and his family.

But this is about to change with the case of Abdikir and his family. The Swedish Migration Board simply do not believe his story, and denied asylum for the family twice. After having been in touch with Abdikir’s lawyer*, it seems to me that the decision was made after an incorrect handling of the case, but first and foremost due to a general lack of knowledge of the current situation in China.

Last month, Jerome Cohen, often referred to as ”the nestor of Chinese law”, agreed that the use of ”ethnic cleansing” in Washington Post to describe the situation in Xinjiang is entirely accurate.

During the past month, the international community have woken up to the extreme extent of the ongoing persecution of Uyghurs in western China. Since 2017 over one million, or about ten percent(!), of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang province has been taken to political prison camps without any judicial progress at all. Many have been held there for over a year and counting. Many others have been forced to relocate and attend daily political propaganda classes. Indeed, several scholars have explained the situation of the Uyghurs in Xinjiang as a war on an entire people and its culture, being waged by the mightiest police state in the world.

But the Swedish authorities do not share this view. Abdikir’s lawyer told me that there was never any doubt from Swedish Migration Board on the identity of him and his family. By presenting documentation such as ID-cards, they were early recognised as Uyghurs from China’s Xinjiang province. Instead, the authorities had doubts regarding the truthfulness of Abdikir’s story and the general situation for Uyghurs in western China.

To begin with, the Migration Board questioned the fact that Abdikir could not present more documents from the argument with the authorities over the demolition of his neighbourhood. If there was a legal case, sure there would also be some documentation? Furthermore, there where doubts about the escape. Why was Abdikir put in a hospital, and how could he escape it despite being guarded by police? Also, the Migration Board wouldn’t believe that an arrested man like Abdikir could use his passport to leave the country.

It didn’t help that Abdikir’s lawyer stressed the fact that this kind of documents is not easily obtained in China. Or the fact that no one thought that Abdikir would leave the country immediately upon his escape from the hospital, and hence his passport was still valid as a travel document. In October 2016 the verdict fell – Abdikir and his family was denied asylum.

The lawyer the proceeded to appeal in the Swedish Migration Court. This time, the lawyer presented new documents from China regarding the demolition case, as well as a statements from the Swedish Uyghur Committee and Amnesty International.

The Swedish Uyghur Committee obviously underscored the dire situation for Uyghurs in Xinjiang and the family’s need for protection, especially given that Abdikir was a member of the committee and hence a villain by association in the eyes of the Chinese authorities. More importantly, Amnesty International submitted a report on the specific case of Abdikir, highlighting the risk that the family would be detained and tortured if deported.

Several organisations confirmed to the Swedish Migration Court the potential dangers of Abdikir’s family returning to China. But this didn’t alter the decision made by the Swedish Migration Board.

None of this helped Abdikir’s case. According to the Migration Court, the new documents presented was of the nature that they could easily have been falsified and therefore didn’t carry enough value as evidence. The statements from Amnesty International and the Swedish Uyghur Committee was not deemed enough to change the ”country facts” of China in the migration authorities’ database. (More on that later.)

Like the Migration Board, the Migration Court pointed to some ”contradictory information” that had been given during the asylum process. The lawyer give me an example of such a ”contradictory” statement, which he himself finds to be ”ridiculous”. One person in the story was describes with two slightly different working titles. But this was due to the fact that several different interpreters had been used during the process. Abdakir had given the same title to two different interpreters – who then just happened to translate it a bit different into Swedish.

So, in April 2017, Abdikir and his family got denied asylum in the Migration Court by three votes to one. They were also told that the third and last instance would not listen to their appeal, and at the same time they were also told to leave Sweden.

Uyghurs who have been living or even studying abroad is a particular target in the ongoing crackdown against Uyghurs in Xinjiang. This summer, I interviewed a handful of Uyghurs currently living in Sweden, whose families had been targeted and taken to prison camps due to the ”unlawful” act of the relative to apply for asylum abroad.

More specifically, reports last month showed that a Uyghur man who was deported from Germany due to an administrative mistake, disappeared immediately after having arrived to China, and hasn’t been heard from since. After the incident, Germany stopped all deportations of Uyghurs.

Abdikir knew what fate was awaiting them if he took his family back to Xinjiang. So instead – after the ruling from the Swedish Migration Court – he last summer decided to go to Germany instead and apply for refugee status there. But according to EU rules, they were sent back to Sweden again once the German authorities found out that his case had already been opened there.

When speaking to Abdikir this week, the situation for him and his family is dire to say the least. They are now a family of four: the daughter now seven years old, and a two year old son that was born in Sweden. Abdikir’s wife is also pregnant, but is experiencing medical difficulties due to the stressful and uncertain situation.

When arriving to Arlanda airport July 20 this year, the Swedish police was already waiting for the family. They were ordered to go and report to the police in the municipality of Gävle, some 170 kilometers north of Stockholm. Since then, the family have been living in a limbo and are now facing immediate deportation to China.

Upon arrival in Gävle on July 21, the police contacted the migration authorities, who refused to further help the family. Upon being forced out of the police station, Abdikir saw no other solution than to sleep in the park just outside. The police then acted ”kind heartedly” according to Abdikir, and drove the family to temporary living facilities managed by the Gävle municipality, demanding them to provide shelter.

But given the past asylum verdicts, the authorities organising temporary living in Gävle Municipality has no legal obligation to provide long term help for Abdikir and his family. On the contrary, they put pressure on Abdikir to visit the Chinese embassy in Stockholm to apply for passports and travel documents needed to return to Xinjiang.

As I am writing this, September 5, Abdikir and his family will get kicked out from their temporary shelter already next week, if they fail to provide documentation that they have been visiting the Chinese embassy in Stockholm.

On the bright side, the lawyer explained to me that there is still a small chance for the family to stay in Sweden. One of the main reasons for the asylum denial is that the Swedish Migration Court do not deem the situation for Uyghurs in Xinjiang severe enough. When it comes to countries like Afghanistan or Somalia – from which Sweden have seen a large influx of refugees lately – there are new assessments and revaluations being done frequently considering the security situation.

But given the small number of asylum seekers from China, updates on the ”country facts” – ie the facts of the current political situation in a certain country that is then being used to judge the need of protection for asylum seekers – is not being done as often for different Chinese regions.

The asylum denial for Abdakir and his family can be revised if the Swedish Migration Court reassess the security situation in western China.

By the time for the first refusal in 2016, the Swedish Migration Board did recognise the ongoing discrimination against Uyghurs in Xinjiang. But it deemed the situation not serious enough to be classified as ”persecution”. Hence, any applicant must also prove his or hers individual need for protection.

According to Swedish immigration law, the lawyer tells me, a case can be opened again if the circumstances in a country or a region changes to the extent that it constitutes ”a new situation”. By providing new information on either the applicant’s situation or the security situation in a country or a region, a case can not only be reopened but the decision can also be revised.

The lawyer also highlight the fact that China is particularly tricky and difficult to deal with on this point. There are no ”black lists” or other obtainable documents to prove the potential risks any certain individual maybe facing. Neither is it easy to alter the perceived security situation or the ”country facts”, since China do not acknowledge any religious persecution let alone any political camps in Xinjiang, and international organisations are effectively barred from the region to verify this existence.

Attention now needs to be brought to the case of Abdikir and his family, if Swedish authorities are not to repeat its fatal failure of 2012 when it sent two Uyghurs straight into the hands of the Chinese authorities. The Swedish Migration Board needs to be convinced that the persecution against Uyghurs in Xinjiang is now serious enough to reopen and revalue this case.

Please do share, rewrite and in other ways help to highlight this case!

* For obvious reasons, neither Abdikir (a shortened name form) or his lawyer wanted their names or contact information in this story. If you would like to get in contact with any of them, please mail me at jojje@inbeijing.se and I will put you in touch.

Correction: An earlier version of this article stated that Abdikir and his family was ”denied asylum twice”. Using the correct terminology, they have applied for asylum only once, but been denied by two instances, namely the Swedish Migration Board and the Swedish Migration Court. The third instance will not hear their appeal.

Sveriges syn på kinesiska företag och investeringar (2/2)

För en knapp vecka sedan skrev jag här på InBeijing en text med rubriken ”Växande problem för kinesiska företag utomlands (1/2)”.

Den blev mycket uppskattad, och som utlovat kommer nu andra delen av texten, vars ambition är att avbilda debatten i Sverige vad gäller kinesiska förvärv och investeringar.

Det ord som bäst sammanfattar läget är: oenighet. Bland politiker, näringsliv, akademiker, journalister och civilsamhälle råder nämligen vitt skilda uppfattningar vad gäller Sveriges ekonomiska utbyte med Kina.

Låt mig ge ett exempel. Efter att Australien för en dryg vecka sedan förbjöd Huawei och ZTE att delta i utbyggnaden av kontinentens 5G-nät, kommenterade Kinakännaren Ola Wong på Twitter att alla kinesiska bolag är ”under partikontroll”. Men tidigare under sommaren hade konsulten Frederic Cho i en intervju med Göteborgs-Posten sagt att ”de flesta kinesiska bolag saknar statliga kopplingar”.

Att två av Sveriges främsta Kinaexperter har i stort sett diametralt motsatta uppfattningar om något så grundläggande som näringslivets förhållande till staten, är ett bevis så gott som något på de stora skillnader i synsätt som finns i debatten.

Om vi hänger kvar vid Frederic Cho, som även är vice ordförande i Sweden-China Trade Council, så menar han att debatten om huruvida kinesiska investeringar kan leda till tekniköverföring till Kina bygger på okunskap.

”För mig är debatten både förvånande och lite beklämmande”, sade Cho nyligen till Göteborgs-Posten.

Detta alltså trots att bland annat USA, Kanada, Tyskland, Storbritannien, Frankrike, Italien och Australien med flera bara under det senaste året antagit eller utformat lagar som är ämnade att hindra denna tekniköverföring.

”Jag tycker utifrån mina egna erfarenheter från Kina att man inte ska vara mer orolig än med något annat land”, vidhöll Cho ändå i en intervju med Realtid under sommaren.

Och detta alltså trots att allt fler organisationer, säkerhetstjänster och politiker varnar just för hur kinesiska bolag köper utländsk teknik med hjälp av statliga kapital.

Göteborgs-Postens hemsida tidigare denna sommar. Tidningen är ofta väldigt positiva till kinesiska investeringar, vars betydelse för Göteborgs ekonomi har vuxit på senare år. Men till vilket pris?

Från de flesta inom näringslivet hörs en liknande uppfattning. ”Nej, det är solklart nej på den frågan”, svarade Patrik Andersson, vd på Business Region Göteborg, i somras på Göteborgs-Postens fråga huruvida det alls finns en risk att kinesiska investeringar innebär att landet lägger beslag på kompetens och teknik.

Somliga är redo att gå ännu längre ändå. Såhär rekommenderade exempelvis Mikael Weissmann, forskare vid Utrikespolitiska Institutet och docent vid Försvarshögskolan, nyligen Sveriges myndigheter och företag att bemöta Kinas kontroversiella jätteprojekt med de nya sidenvägarna (BRI):

Svenska regeringen och näringslivet borde oroa sig mindre för bristen på transparens och klara regler och bli mycket mer engagerade i BRI. Det finns ett behov att vara proaktiv snarare än reaktiv för att maximera de möjliga fördelarna med BRI.

Weissmann är alltså i princip inne på samma linje som Kinas ambassadör i Stockholm, som förra månaden i en debattartikel i Svenska Dagbladet rekommenderade svenska aktörer att sätta sin tillit till BRI för att Kinas kommunistparti lovar att det är ett bra projekt(!)

Rekommendationen från Weissmann var dock så okritisk att till och med Frederic Cho ifrågasatte den. Och detta kan i sin tur ses som ytterligare en måttstock, då kritiken mot rapporter likt Weissmanns kommer från konsulter som finner debatten om Kinas teknikstöld förvånande och beklämmande.

Vad jag vill ha sagt med detta är: nästan ingenstans inom näringslivet, bland konsulter eller i affärspress funderar man i handelsrelationen till Kina över långsiktiga bekymmer angående mänskliga rättigheter eller ekonomisk och politisk beroendeställning.

Detta ligger kanske i sakens natur att företagare och konsulter vill tjäna pengar. Inom akademien ser det dock något annorlunda ut. Visserligen kan även Weissmann klassas som forskare, men inom akademien finns även röster som uttrycker oro för Kinas pengar.

Johan Lagerkvist, professor i Kinas språk och kultur vid Stockholms universitet, har bland annat varnat för att ”omvärldens hunger efter kinesiska pengar kan komma i konflikt när man har att göra med ett starkt land som Kina som inte respekterar mänskliga rättigheter, yttrandefrihet och demokrati”.

Magnus Fiskesjö, tidigare kulturattaché vid Sveriges ambassad i Peking som nu undervisar vid Cornell University, är ytterligare en akademiker som ofta hörs i debatten. Han har flera gånger uttryckt sin tro om att den svenska politikers värderingar redan i dag låter sig påverkas av Kinas ekonomiska inflytande, och framhåller regeringens hantering av den kidnappade förläggaren Gui Minhai som exempel på detta.

Visst skulle jag kunna räkna upp hur många namn och exempel som helst här. Så jag nöjer mig istället med att konstatera att det inom debatten fortfarande råder ett relativt positivt skimmer kring kinesiska förvärv och investeringar i Sverige – i vilket fall långt mer positivt (naivt?) än i Nordamerika, Australien och andra delar av Europa.

Johan Lagerkvist är en av de svenska forskare som oftast och tydligast varnar om utvecklingen gällande mänskliga rättigheter i Kina, samt vad detta potentiellt kan innebära för kinesiska investeringar. Jag vet av egen erfarenhet att många akademiker, företagare och andra medvetet väljer att aldrig belysa de negativa aspekterna av Kinas utveckling. Detta på grund av rädsla för att inte få resa dit, eller på annat vis gå miste om tillgången till kinesiska marknader eller resurser.

Även inom partipolitiken existerar stora meningsskiljaktigheter om kinesiska förvärv och investeringar. Och det kan ju vara intressant att belysa såhär i valtider.

Den nuvarande regeringen har en uttalad strategi att locka investeringar från Kina. Detta har man dels deklarerat rakt ut som en policy, och dels materialiserat bland annat i och med den stora affärsresa som Stefan Löfven sommaren 2017 gjorde till Kina tillsammans med flera ministrar och representanter för över 60 myndigheter och företag.

Regeringen har dels valt att föra denna politik på bekostnad av mänskliga rättigheter. Som jag och flera har påpekat så nämnde man inte ens Gui Minhai vid namn under denna resa.

Guis namn – eller någonting annat gällande mänskliga rättigheter – stod heller inte att finna i den av nya ekonomiska samarbetsavtal fyllda kommuniké som lades upp på regeringskansliets hemsida efter resan.

Nuvarande regering motsätter sig också den kontrollmekanism som EU vill införa på central nivå för att överse kinesiska och andra utomeuropeiska investeringar. Förslaget – som initierades av finansministrarna i Tyskland, Frankrike och Italien – avfärdas av den svenska regeringen som protektionism.

När handels- och EU-minister Ann Linde tidigare i år fick frågan av Aktuellt fick frågan om en tuffare europeisk handelspolitik mot Kina, så gömde hon sig istället bakom utslitna floskler som att den ekonomiska utvecklingen även leder till förbättringar av det kinesiska rättsystemet och mänskliga rättigheter.

Som jag tidigare här på InBeijing uppmärksammat, så kallar Moderaternas partiledare Ulf Kristersson regeringens inställning till kinesiska investeringar för “naiv”, och beskriver en gemensam europeisk strategi mot Kina som “absolut nödvändig”. Läs mer om detta i följande inlägg:

Ulf Kristersson och Angela Merkel diskuterar Kinas inflytande i Europa” (1 juni 2018)
Ulf Kristersson gör nya, hårda uttalanden om Kina” (13 april 2018)
Moderaternas partiledare efterlyser en tuffare Kinapolitik” (28 februari 2018)

Tidigare i år meddelade Kristersson även via DN att – med hänvisning till kinesiskt kapital – nya tider kräver en ny politik, och utfärdade även ett vallöfte med anledning av detta:

Den senaste tiden har kinesiska investeringar i Sverige väckt både entusiasm och kritik. En tidigare militär hamn i Fårösund på Gotland köptes av en Hongkong-kines men är nu åter statligt ägd. I Lysekil har kinesiska intressen önskat bygga en jättehamn. I Årjäng hoppas man att en snabbjärnväg Stockholm-Oslo finansierad av Kina ska dras genom kommunen.

Den grekiska hamnen i Piraeus köptes av ett kinesiskt företag. Hamnen ingår i ett strategiskt projekt som kallas ”De nya sidenvägarna”. Det ses av Kina-kännare som en plan att dominera världen genom att investera i vägar, järnvägar, fibernät och annan infrastruktur.

– Stora kinesiska förvärv med statligt kapital i ryggen innebär en delvis annan situation än när vanliga demokratiska länder handlar med varandra. Det har funnits en osäkerhet om vilka säkerhetsrisker och långsiktigt inflytande som följer med investeringarna, konstaterar Ulf Kristersson.

I samma artikel sade Kristersson även att Sverige bör ändra uppfattning i frågan om ett regelverk på central EU-nivå, och stödja etableringen av ett sådant för att överse säkerhetsaspekterna i samband utomeuropeiska investeringar. Och detta med särskild anledning av kinesiska investeringar.

Vallöftet bestod i att starta en utredning för att ge Sveriges regering möjlighet att granska och, om det ur säkerhetssynpunkt är nödvändigt, även stoppa utländska investeringar i svenska kommuner.

Någon sådan mekanism existerar inte i Sverige i dag, och Kristersson varnade för att det finns en ”aningslöshet gentemot de kinesiska investeringarna”. En av hans partikollegor citeras också i samma artikel:

Ett moderat vallöfte är att snabbt starta en utredning för hur direktinvesteringar ska kunna granskas, förses med villkor och ytterst kunna stoppas.

– Tolv europeiska länder har sådan lagstiftning och även USA, Kanada och Australien. Våra grannländer Danmark, Norge och Finland har det. Varför har vi inte det i Sverige? Vi blir svaret skyldiga. Det handlar inte bara om hamnar utan också om cybersäkerhet och olika avancerade produkter, säger den moderate Europaparlamentarikern Christofer Fjellner.

Sverige har i dag alltså inget regelverk för att på central nivå stoppa utomeuropeiska investeringar. Detta trots att Säkerhetspolisen varnat för utländska intressen som köper in sig i svenska data-, tele-, och kraftföretag. Enligt SÄPO bedriver Kina det näst mest intensiva spionaget i Sverige i dag efter Ryssland.

Den djuphavshamn som en kinesisk affärsman planerade bygga i Lysekil är ett exempel på ett projekt som hade kunnat gå genom på grund av avsaknaden av ett sådant regelverk.

Kommunpolitiker förhandlade där bakom stängda dörrar med de kinesiska intressenterna. Hamnen stoppades främst tack vare ett aktivt civilsamhälle, och kanske även delvis tack vare mitt avslöjande i Fokus om att investeraren hade nära relationer till Kinas regim och militär.

Ulf Kristersson är den som tydligast pekat med hela handen vad gäller vikten av att vara aktsam mot kinesiska investeringar och förvärv.

Kort sagt så är vår nuvarande regering rädd att vidta åtgärder som eventuellt skulle minska kinesiskt kapital till Sverige, medan Kristersson med bakgrund mot potentiella risker vill gå mer varsamt fram, med tanke på vad han ofta kallar ”den kinesiska regimens ambitioner”.

En inverterad höger-vänsterskala för många kanske. Men i förhållandet till Kina står det utom tvivel att S främst är ute efter pengar, medan M är mer villiga att tala om såväl säkerhetsrisker som mänskliga rättigheter.