Lam's return of Cambridge fellowship show's hypocrisy of West's honor

By Li Qingqing Source: Global Times Published: 2020/8/16 22:18:40

Carrie Lam File photo:Xinhua

Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam on Saturday announced that she had voluntarily given up her honorary fellowship at Cambridge University's Wolfson College after it made groundless accusations that she has deviated from "academic freedom and freedom of speech." The college had previously been under pressure to revoke Lam's fellowship after the enactment of the national security law for Hong Kong.

This reminds people of Myanmar State Counsellor Aung San Suu Kyi, who was stripped of an honor granting her the Freedom of Oxford due to her response to the Rohingya crisis. Oxford city councilors said they did not want to honor "those who turn a blind eye to violence."

For political leaders, these so-called honors of Western countries are nothing compared to the interests of the people. The highest honor for a politician should be improving people's livelihoods, economic development and social prosperity, instead of these Western labels that are full of ideological prejudices and aim at serving the interests of the West.

The West has always judged other countries' political leaders or other individuals, especially countries with geopolitical significance, on the basis of whether they are willing to act in line with Western interests. 

For example, TIME magazine in 2019 chose "Hong Kong protesters" as one of its 25 most influential people on the internet. But over a few months, these protesters set fires in Hong Kong subway stations and almost paralyzed the airport. They even poured gasoline over innocent people who had different political positions and set them on fire. These people are completely rioters. 

And Suu Kyi, who was previously placed under house arrest in 1989 and spent 15 of the next 21 years in custody, was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1991 and regarded as an icon of democracy.

However, when these leaders make decisions that are regarded as not in line with Western political interests, they will question these so-called honors or revoke them. It is much too obvious that these "honors" are purely political.

Through these so-called honors, Western countries want to entice political leaders of non-Western countries to serve the interests of the West. 

Lam firmly supports the national security law for Hong Kong, and this is in line with Hong Kong's stability and prosperity. Likewise, in the face of development problems and ethnic conflicts, Suu Kyi has adopted a pragmatic attitude rather than blindly safeguarding the "democracy icon" label granted to her by the West. Lam and Suu Kyi are responsible to the people and they deserve the highest honor.

But instead of praising these politicians, the West chose to revoke these so-called honors. More and more countries will be aware of the West's tricks. People have come to realize how hypocritical the West's "honors" are, and how it tries to sabotage the stability and prosperity of countries with different ideologies. 

The West's so-called honors completely represent Western political interests. In the face of Western countries' intervention and instigation, responsible politicians will put their own national interests first. After all, anyone can see which is more important - an award that represents the West's interests, or the interests of a country's own people.

Posted in: OBSERVER

blog comments powered by Disqus