Barring entry of cult supporter totally reasonable

By Ai Jun Source:Global Times Published: 2018/3/22 23:57:17

John Hugh, a Chinese Australian and former councilor for Parramatta City Council of Australia, recently complained to The New York Times that he had been denied entry to China for being an outspoken critic of Beijing's efforts to influence Australian politics.

"I asked what the reason was and they just said, 'You should know,'" Hugh was quoted as saying, after he was put on the next flight back to Australia from Shanghai.

He then told The New York Times that he was punished by China, adding, "you'll pay the price for not being a Communist voice."

The truth is reports show that Hugh has been involved in activities related to a local cult organization. Beijing has good reasons to suspect that he might have participated in cult activities aimed at subverting the Chinese government and thus has full reason to temporarily stop him entering China.

Cults are a global headache. The world is quite unanimous in its stance toward them: hit hard, no mercy.

Take the US for example. When the country was mopping up the Christian cult Branch Davidians in 1993, its government launched a siege with helicopters, tanks and armored vehicles in Waco, Texas, which led to a 51-day standoff and more than 80 deaths.

Even if Hugh is backed by certain foreign forces, the activity in which he participated is unacceptable to China. No government would tolerate a cult engaged in subversive activity.

It is suspected that the purpose of Hugh's trip to China is to interfere in China's domestic politics. Restricting him from entering China is therefore in accordance with Chinese laws and regulations.

Hugh is attempting to find a seemingly righteous excuse for himself. Yet it is more than obvious that he is utilizing Australia's current political environment as his cover. He made his accusation when Canberra was ratcheting up its anti-China rhetoric, which stemmed from both its political strife and vigilance against China's emergence.

Lacking a sober awareness of its own strategic interests, Canberra is kidnapped by its own confusion.

We are not opposed to different political voices, but this is not a case of freedom of speech being trampled upon as Hugh claims. It is brazen interference in China's domestic politics.

It is clear that in asking for a reason for his denial, Hugh is being deliberately obtuse. He knows exactly what he did.

Posted in: OBSERVER

blog comments powered by Disqus