Opinion | The politicization of tragedy and the Jilin stabbings

By Tom Fowdy

Several days ago, a Chinese man stabbed four American scholars in a public park. The scholars were visiting from Cornell College in Iowa. The man was later arrested, while the victims were hospitalized with non-life-threatening injuries. As rare as this kind of incident is, it did not take much for certain individuals, as well as the media at large, to jump on it and push a narrative that this proved China is "not safe" for foreigners to visit. Others went further, speculating baselessly that the attack stemmed from an "Anti-foreigner" "Boxer rebellion" type backlash in China.

Of course, the attacker's motivation is not known, and nor for that matter is it particularly relevant given such incidents can occur pretty much anywhere in the world. In European countries, especially France and Germany, Jihadist terrorism in the form of stabbing attacks is ubiquitous, and of course who can forget that mass shooting incidents in the United States happen pretty much every other day. Never in any case do we get people pushing narratives proclaiming that these popular locations are in fact "unsafe" to visit. Similarly, when hate crimes against Asians in the US surged because of anti-China policies and media coverage, we were told we should not talk about it because it is "propaganda" by the "Communist Party."

Thus, despite all of this, one stabbing incident is marked as definitive regarding all of China. This is logically absurd, to say the least. This of course speaks volumes as to how unbalanced today's media environment is, where every single negative development in China is quickly twisted and astroturfed to become a politicized attack on the country and its government in its entirety. This kind of discourse is unhelpful, and polarising and also prevents the balanced discussion of serious issues, not least because everyone who subsequently fights back against this narrative, namely myself, is denounced as some kind of mouthpiece or puppet of China. In other words, sensible discussion is lost in the "political noise" generated.

It is nonetheless comprehensively true that the US has sought to deliberately discourage travel and people-to-people engagement with China, with its goal of economically, technologically, and politically containing the state, in particular, to undermine the incentive and enthusiasm of businessmen to go there. The State Department has slapped a high-level travel warning on China, equating it to countries such as the Democratic Republic of the Congo, warning of "arbitrary arrest." The mainstream media have also produced many, many fearmongering articles designed to discourage travel. As political ties worsen, it is also (as I said in yesterday's article) a natural disincentive to engage with the country, especially as a big country, as you find you have politicians on your back, and things are invented to accuse you on a "guilt by association basis" of certain things.

To add to that, if you are in fact a scientist or engineer of any kind, visiting or collaborating with China these days is a one way trip to getting arrested and accused of espionage. The FBI's "China initiative" has sent shockwaves down the academic and scientific community in America, and even mutually beneficial research collaboration on non-sensitive subjects such as Cancer Research has even been hammered. Therefore, although the zero COVID years are a huge factor, it is no surprise at all that only 700 US students are currently studying in Chinese Universities, and if we subtract those who have a Chinese heritage or parentage, that number is likely to be even less. Who's fault is that? The media will naturally say "Xi Jinping" and of course I acknowledge zero COVID as one factor, but it's not the only thing is it?

Regardless, this is all a bit ironic when the US ambassador to China, Nicholas Burns, has proclaimed that he wants to promote "people to people" ties in academia with the PRC, has someone not pointed out to him that his Presidential Administration's policy is in fact intended to do the opposite? His words don't mean anything as obviously the administration offers no resources or incentives and makes no attempts to promote such in practice (even if we disregard all its other policies). The US does not want serious engagement with China, and thus it should not surprise us that such horrific events like that in Jinlin are quickly escalated to confirm these narratives. This of course makes it very sad for that small number of people who do make the effort, but having devoted a lot of time to visiting China myself as a foreigner I can honestly say there's more chance of something like this happening to you in Paris, Berlin, New York or even London, than in Beijing or Shanghai, I might even cynically add Tokyo to that list giving mass stabbing incidents do happen in Japan. But of course, the best way is never to be discouraged and to stop scoring political points over incidents like this.

The author is a well-seasoned writer and analyst with a large portfolio related to China topics, especially in the field of politics, international relations and more. He graduated with an Msc. in Chinese Studies from Oxford University in 2018.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.

Read more articles by Tom Fowdy:

Opinion | How the US uses arbitrary supply chain laws to undercut China

Opinion | The study on British media negativity pertaining to China is the tip of the iceberg

Opinion | The inconsequential and inevitable landslide, a British election without real choice

Opinion | Can China-Japan-South Korea trilateralism achieve meaningful results