Higher ground or bottom?

By Yi Bing Source: Globaltimes.cn Published: 2019/12/10 8:50:04

Photo: VCG


Even by UK standards 2019 is full of drama, with a spectacular 2 Brexit deals, 2 prorogues, 3 delays, and almost as many prime ministers, depending on how one counts.

Amidst all the backs and forths over Brexit-THE QUESTION of the time for the UK, the Foreign Affairs Committee of the House of Commons released a report on defending democracy against autocracies, just in time before the parliament's dismissal on 6 November.

By autocracies it means, first and foremost, China. The authors had no intention to hide their concerns about "academic freedom" in the UK being compromised by Chinese students and Confucius Institutes. Such was the priority that it was placed next only to introduction.

Not all agreed with FAC's concerns. The Russel Group was dismissive when inquired, while chairman of the Million Plus, representing 20 universities, said he had "not heard one piece of evidence". 

But the authors found what they wanted from alternative sources anyway.

To them, you are only on the right side if you protest against China, siding with chaos and violence in Hong Kong, the violent side of which, except for police reaction to violence, gets ignored anyway.

To them, any organization can be an instrument of interference if it gets some form of support from the Chinese government. Then what about the British Council, the Chevening Scholarship, or the BBC, one may wonder? Maybe something is indeed implied and deserves a closer look.

To them, China's contacts with its students overseas and local academic institutions are unwanted and dangerous. Is China that influential? Or is someone just too insecure and their faith in the much cherished "academic freedom" too fragile?

The authors were much more broad-minded than only listening to concerns at home. Foreign cases were quoted too, from countries where China-bashing is THE politically correct thing to do or where convicted fraudster's stories are more than bankable.

It reminds us of a classic western paradox, "If one can't prove god does not exist, you can't argue against his existence." Proving interference not existing, a negative, is logically impossible. And that's exactly what was intended by the authors.

By putting this "interfering", "autocratic" label on China, they attempt to claim a high ground as prophets of sober warnings. It does not matter if their case stands or their label sticks, since they have moved on already to whip the public opinion and government policy in "toughening up" against China.

The subject of "academic freedom" is just another piece of emperor's new clothes trying hard in vain to cover hypocrisy.  It offers a subterfuge to detract the patriotism and solidarity of Chinese students, something neither approved nor welcomed by the report's authors, who are accustomed to say what they want and do what they please with impunity at others' cost. 

In much the same spirit, warships are sent to transgress other countries' territorial waters in otherwise peaceful regions to "uphold the freedom of navigation". 

Reasoning with hypocrites galore is as futile as explaining the grandeur of the universe to two-dimensional beings.

But when dusts settle after the December election is done and Brexit fixed, there are a few questions about China for which Britain needs to do some soul searching:

Does a globalizing UK welcome Chinese students, all of them, all about them, including their patriotism?

Does Britain want a constructive partnership with China, building bridges not fences?

Is it in Britain's interest for a few opinionated hijacking public opinion with political correctness and scary stories in a race to the bottom?

"Be water" was the mantra of rioters in Hong Kong this summer and autumn.

One is always expected to keep moving towards higher ground. Water, on the other hand, knows no bounds but the bottom. 

If water keeps flooding in and you drift with it, it is everything but high ground where you are heading for.



Posted in: EUROPE

blog comments powered by Disqus