Opinion | UK differential treatments to outsider expose its hypocrisy again

By Edward Hei Leung, LegCo Member

Given the massive influx of illegal immigrants, the UK government announced a migration partnership sending thousands of asylum seekers to Rwanda. However, its differential treatments to refugees have repeatedly widened our horizons, and exposed the western double standard.

Under the newly introduced scheme, Rwanda will grant those refugees the right of abode, not to mention the right to work and enroll in health care services. In spite of government's reassurances, refugee organizations question Rwanda's human right conditions under the rule of President Paul Kagame.

Even the UNHCR, a UN refugee agency, expresses the grievance to the UK-Rwanda migration plan in which UK administration shifts its asylum responsibilities to a third-world country. "Refugees should not be traded like commodities. They deserve compassion and empathy", UNHCR's assistant high commissioner Gillian Triggs added. In other words, the UK does not only send undesirable persons to a third-world country with poor human records, but also evades its international obligation in the Refugee Convention. Is it ironic that such an irresponsible act sources from a government claiming to defend Hong Kong citizens' rights?

Maybe it looks better for Ukraine refugees who can at least reside in the territory through visa applications, in comparison with those asylum seekers. However, the Guardian reports a distinctive story in which Ukrainian workers flee modern slavery condition on UK farms. Long working hours, unachievable targets, the lack of protective gloves, accommodation without bathrooms, running water or kitchen, to name but a few. To the interviewed Ukrainian, working on the farm is probably one of her worst experiences in life. As reported, she and her boyfriend work in underground economy, due to the breach of working visas.

In light of this, I wonder if UK farms commit forced labor. If that truly happens, where is the ground of Johnson administration to blame China? Remember, unlike UK, the forced labor in Xinjiang is a completely pseudo-proposition.

Aside from Ukrainians, if we trace back to last year, there were around 15,000 refugees Afghans, who received six-month visas from UK Home Office. According to BBC report, many of them currently live in hotels in Northern Ireland, some with no ideas of future life. One of the victims asked the reason why UK people were treating Ukraine crisis differently whereas Afghans were detained in British hotels. Apparently, compared with the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the UK is more liable for what happens in the Afghanistan war, particularly when it deployed army onto Afghanistan soil. Then, why are refugees not treated in the same way? Does the UK administration generously welcome Afghans?

Given the emotional attachment with the colonial era, some Hong Kong residents appreciate the extension of BNO visa program. However, in comparison with investment immigration, the latest 5+1 program is somehow similar to a refugee scheme. As the aforementioned, the UK has a poor record on treating refugees. No one knows whether BNO visa holders would receive a full British passport afterwards. As a friendly reminder, it is always an open-ended question to UK politicians to review the controversial BNO policy. Imagine you are UK locals, facing a group of outsiders who are probably the culprit of high property price and fierce competition for socio-economic resources. What would you think? If UK politicians find out that the cost of accommodating HK residents outweighing the geopolitical benefits, the future ahead might not be as bright as BNO visa holders thought.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.

Read more articles by Edward Hei Leung:

Opinion | YouTube has ruined itself into a political tool to exercise hegemonic power

Opinion | The world needs a responsible leader rather than a human right judger