A group of more than 50 investors said they are contacting more than 40 multinational companies, including H&M, VF Corp, Hugo Boss and Inditex, the parent company of Zara, to demand more information about their supply chains and urge them to withdraw from links or sectors that could lead to human rights abuses.
Reuters reports that the group of religiously and socially conscious investors and other funds are pressuring Western companies over alleged human rights abuses in China’s Xinjiang region, a move that underscores the challenges facing brands trying to maintain business relationships amid escalating tensions.
Anita Dorett, program director for the Investor Alliance for Human Rights, said she is concerned that some companies, fearing a backlash from Chinese social media and corporations, have removed language from their corporate websites about forced labor policies or pledged to buy more from Xinjiang of cotton.
“Companies are not prioritizing their resources to dig into their supply chains and map them out. As investors, we want transparency and accountability,” Doret told Reuters. “That’s the extent of their business. If they don’t know what’s going on, who does?”
The Investor’s Human Rights Coalition’s website says it has more than 160 institutional investors and other organizations that currently have more than $5 trillion in assets under management.
These investors are religiously and socially conscious and have the support of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility.
The Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility has a broad membership that includes religious groups, public and union pension funds, and a number of other asset management firms.
Over the past week, H&M, Burberry, Nike, Adidas and other Western brands have been boycotted by Chinese consumers over their past concerns about forced labor in Xinjiang, propagated by Communist Party organizations and the media.
The boycott comes in the wake of sanctions imposed by the United Kingdom, Canada, the European Union and the United States for human rights abuses in Xinjiang. As always, the CCP denies all allegations of abuse.
In the latest episode of “Yokogawa Live,” China studies expert Yokogawa said, “(The CCP feels) that retaliation between countries does not feel relieved, does not hurt the other side, and is not reciprocal, because other people’s parliamentarians and scholars do not have savings and mansions in China, and do not need visas to go to China. The hard can’t gnaw, so hit the soft it, the country to the company, the package win not lose. This is the idea of the Chinese Communist Party.” Yokogawa said.
But on the other hand, these foreign companies in China for economic interests, the long-standing policy of appeasement also in a certain degree to fuel the Chinese Communist Party.
For decades, most foreign companies operating in China have been careful not to give the impression that they are critical of the Chinese (Communist) government, and have chosen to rest on their laurels even when attacked by the Communist Party’s growing nationalist online water army.
Kyle Bass, founder of Hayman Capital and a leading U.S. hedge fund mogul, told Fox Business TV, “If you leave it (the decision) to the private sector, or if you leave the leadership of the United States to the private sector, then the private sector is almost 100 percent putting profits ahead of morality. “
I think it’s important, from a national security perspective and from a moral perspective, that the U.S. government avoid doing business with countries that commit genocide and Crimes Against Humanity,” he said.
“Companies can’t wait among themselves to make more money in China, and the reality is that evil regimes are doing unimaginable things to people.” Bass added.
The human rights section of H&M’s website hmgroup.com no longer has a link to the Xinjiang 2020 statement as of 26. However, the statement can still be accessed directly through the web address.
The statement on forced labor on the Inditex website has been inaccessible since 25.
The Corporate Investor Coalition, which requires 40 multinational companies to provide supply chain information, says companies are removing or changing Xinjiang-related statements out of fear of business retaliation from the Chinese (Communist) government; however, other markets, including the European Union, are also developing compliance rules that require companies to fully disclose their supply chains.
This move means that these multinational companies that rely on the Chinese market will receive increasing moral pressure from domestic sources.
In general, more and more European companies are facing a difficult dilemma as the politicization of business continues to rise,” said the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China in an earlier written response to VOA.
“On the one hand, public opinion in Europe demands that companies clearly demonstrate the principles of responsible social responsibility. But on the other hand, if (companies) they show responsibility and ensure that their supply chains are protected from criticism, they are seen as making an anti-China (Anti-Communist) stance, and are therefore subject to another strong backlash from the Chinese public.” The statement said.
Recent Comments