TO UNDERSTAND China means to “see the country in its own terms and as it sees itself rather than simply through Western lenses”, the Bishop of Winchester, the Rt Revd Philip Mounstephen, said in the House of Lords’ final debate of 2024, on “China: Human rights and security”.

Human rights and freedom of religion or belief were among the chief concerns as the House considered Britain’s future relations with China amid questions over China’s treatment of the Uyghur Muslims.

Referring to the ancient Chinese “concept of tianxia, a word that means ‘all under heaven’ — describing a system of relations across Asia, with China as the centre of the civilised world and the apex of culture”, Bishop Mountstephen said that his concept had languished, “only to reassert itself now under President Xi, just as neo-Tsarism has in Russia. . .

“It manifests itself in Tibet, Xinjiang, and Hong Kong, in the South China Sea, in aggression towards Taiwan, in transnational repression, and in malign influence such as we have seen here in recent days. It is seen specifically in violations of religion or belief. Religious minorities — Muslims in Xinjiang, Buddhists in Tibet, Falun Gong and Christians across China — must be repressed, because they do not accept that ultimate authority rests with the one at the heart of the system, as tianxia dictates.”

Bishop Mounstephen chaired the Independent Review of Christian Persecution, commissioned in 2018 by the Foreign Office (News, 26 December 2018). Resuming the theme in this debate, he said that “a religiously illiterate approach that relies on Western secular assumptions simply will not do, and we cannot counter a three-millennia-old concept by appeal to a Universal Declaration of Human Rights that was drawn up only in 1948, deeply as I believe in it. . . We must take a religiously informed approach to such a concept.”

He welcomed the new special envoy for freedom of religion or belief, David Smith MP (News, 17 December 2024), and hoped that “his office will be properly resourced, both financially and with staff, so that he can make the fullest impact possible in his role”. He was clear that “only a robust approach to China will do.”

Following him, Lord Ahmad said that “there was much in his reflections; he was looking at things from having a lens on a country he knows.”

Speaking as “the grandson of former medical missionaries in south-west China”, the Bishop of Guildford, the Rt Revd Andrew Watson, explained his personal interest in the debate. He wished specifically “to highlight the desperate situation of Uyghur Muslims in the north-western region of Xinjiang . . . declared as being subject to genocide”, and urged the Government “to ensure that the screening of goods made in forced labour camps — everything from solar panels to tomatoes — prevents them being imported into this country”.

He continued: “The challenges faced by Uyghur Muslims are now well-documented. They are herded into so-called vocational skills, education, and training centres, surrounded by guards who operate a shoot-to-kill policy on those who would try to escape. Subjected to mass indoctrination, forced labour, and coercive sterilisation, it is hard to imagine a more egregious example of modern slavery in the world today. It was hugely encouraging that the Labour Party, in opposition, gave such an unwavering commitment to the call to designate these atrocities as genocide, pure and simple — or, as we might say, impure and simple.”

On the evils of modern slavery, and noting the import of goods at British airports from Xinjiang province, “an area declared to be the subject of an ongoing genocide”, Bishop Watson hoped that the UK would cease becoming “the dumping ground for goods produced in such horrendous circumstances”.

Speaking for the Government, Baroness Chapman shared the concerns on human rights. “Across China, people face restrictions and violations of human rights and other fundamental freedoms,” she said. She echoed Bishop Watson’s words: “In Xinjiang, China continues to persecute and arbitrarily detain Uyghurs and other predominantly Muslim minorities.”

In his concluding speech, Lord Alton said that “nobody suffers more at the hands of the Chinese Communist Party than the Chinese people themselves”; it was crucial, he said, to keep “engaging on things such as zero emissions. . . One third of all emissions come out of China, which has never kept to any of the targets — just as it did not keep to the promises made 40 years ago today in the Sino-British accord.

“Britain has a proud tradition of standing up to tyranny. I hope that we will continue to do that . . . The eyes of the world are on this British Parliament, that we speak out when others are silent, and that notice will be taken of the eloquent speeches that have been made here today.”