It was China, not the US, that the world looked to as the country with the economic and political clout needed to move things forward in Myanmar and Darfur - and not without good cause. China is Sudan's largest trading partner and Myanmar's second largest.

Amnesty International's research has shown that Chinese arms have been transferred to Darfur, Sudan in defiance of the UN arms embargo. China has long justified its support for abusive governments, such as those of Sudan, Myanmar and Zimbabwe, by defining human rights as an internal matter for sovereign states, and not as an issue for its foreign policy - as it suited China's political and commercial interests.

Yet China's position is neither immutable nor intractable. In 2007, it voted in favour of the deployment of the hybrid peacekeeping force in Darfur, pressured Myanmar to accept the visit of the UN Special Envoy and reduced its overt support for President Mugabe of Zimbabwe.

Good business sense

The same factors that drove China in the past to open relations with repressive regimes may well be motivating the changes in its policy towards them today: the need for reliable sources of energy and other natural resources.

Amnesty International and other human rights organisations have long argued that countries with poor human rights records do not create good business environments - business needs political stability and human rights provide that.

It is possible that China too is beginning to recognise that supporting unstable regimes with poor human rights records does not make good business sense, that if it is to protect its assets and citizens abroad, it must support global values that create long-term political stability.

Olympic clampdown

Notwithstanding its diplomatic shifts, China has a long way to go. It remains the largest arms supplier to Sudan since 2004. It vetoed a UN Security Council resolution condemning Myanmar's human rights practices in January 2007 and has yet to live up to the promises it made on human rights in the run up to the Beijing Olympics.

Some reforms in the use of the death penalty and relaxation of rules for foreign media in 2007 were outweighed by the clampdown on human rights activists in China, on domestic media and expanding the scope of "re-education through labour", a form of detention without charge or trial, as part of the "clean-up" of Beijing prior to the Games.

Shifting the debate

The run up to the Olympics has provided less room for improvement and more for confrontation on human rights in China.

As the dust settles on the Olympics, the international community will need to develop an effective strategy for shifting the human right debate with China to a more productive and progressive plane.

The Government for its part must recognise that global leadership brings responsibilities and expectations, and that a global player, if it is to be credible, cannot ignore the values and principles which form the collective identity of the international community.

  • Adapted from the foreword to Amnesty International’s Report 2008 The State of the World's Human Rights, which was released on 28 May.