By Philip Yeung
He is at it again, the dean of China's knee-jerk critics. Simon Tisdall is his usual hysterical self, out to scuttle Starmer's upcoming trip to Beijing, because he is allergic to the idea.
He wants to tie the visit to the release of Hong Kong's convicted agitator-in-chief Jimmy Lai whose conviction is seen as "another hostile act". What a leap in logic! Since when does prosecuting a Chinese subversive an act of hostility towards Britain? Just because he holds a dodgy BNO passport?
Lai is no freedom fighter. He is just a pawn. He fanned the flames of violent protests that paralyzed the city for nine months. And what was he fighting tooth-and-nail for? For one-person-one-vote in picking the leader. That sounds noble, until you remember that under the 1984 Joint Declaration, the leader-elect needs Beijing's blessing, rendering the contest hollow.
Lai knew that chaos sells his papers, the Apple Daily, the bigger the better. He loomed large as godfather of street protests.
Tisdall fingers China for breaking its solemn promise to respect Hong Kong's post-handover freedoms. Wrong again. Beijing looked away when robotic rioters called for the overthrow of the Chinese government.
That level of freedom never existed under British rule. If you insulted the British monarch, you faced instant incarceration or deportation.
To keep the peace, Article 23 protecting national security was not enacted for two decades. Beijing held its nose, until the agitators turned the city upside down, turning it into the capital of chaos, a hot bed of lawless protests.
A romantic city lost its mojo and its soul. That is Lai's biggest sin. Lai himself basked in the glory of his frequent pilgrimages to Washington, genuflecting before China-haters like Nancy Pelosi.
Hong Kong police officers only wield non-lethal tear-gas, while Britain shamelessly designates pro-Palestinian protestors terrorists.
Time to come down from your moral high horse. Hong Kong was denied democracy under Britain. Then, pre-handover, its last governor planted a Trojan horse to turn the city into an ungovernable mess—a sin pinned on Beijing for its "brutal suppression of freedom".
Britain stole Hong Kong by selling China opium in 1842. Late last century, it sold Hong Kong opium of another kind--a toxic political ideology. The opium trafficker has struck again.
Tisdall warns Starmer against walking into a Beijing bear trap. But marginalized Britain has nothing to sell. Its leader is going to Beijing with a begging bowl, as Britain's stagnant economy needs a Chinese jumpstart.
Tisdall's well has run dry, gushing venom without factual validation, tossing labels, calling China "Britain's undeclared enemy". But British and Chinese interests barely intersect. To qualify as an "enemy", you must first matter. But it is China that matters to Britain, not the other way around. Tisdall's got it backwards.
Tisdall hyperventilates about the comedy of a Chinese "spy", involving the laughable case of a Chinese-British permanent resident being buddy with the disgraced former prince Andrew. It is the simple story of a pariah prince selling access for his own survival to a deep-pocket Chinese status-seeker. Case closed.
"Cyber-attacks" are just a puff of hot air. Huawei was preemptively banned before it could benefit Britain. The China threat is pure fiction, as China "demons" dwell only in opportunistic heads.
Tisdall faults No. 10 for "dragging its heels" over designating China a major security threat. The Chinese have a proverb, "River water and well water don't mix or merge." Sino-British national interests barely intersect, with China on its way up, and Britain on its way down. It's horses for courses.
Finally, he drags out the inevitable mushy moral argument, that China is challenging Britain's values. This is the height of hypocrisy. This is post-imperial hogwash! Why is he mum about Saudi Arabia values? Is it because of its oil wealth?
On Xinjiang and Tibet, Tisdall is lazy, blind, and ignorant. Minorities in China enjoy preferential treatment in higher education and exemption from the draconian one-child policy. The Gaza genocide is decimating the local population. But the Xinjiang Muslim population is mushrooming. How does he square these contradictions?
His ultimate insult? Reversing the roles of victim and invader, accusing China of posing a military threat to Japan! To Tisdall, any entity that is anti-China, however amoral or criminal, automatically gets a halo.
Japan is remorseless over slaughtering 35 million Chinese. Now it threatens war with China over Taiwan. Japan has never been invaded, and never will be, as it sits smack in an earthquake zone.
Japan provoking China is like Germany threatening to re-invade Britain. That is how twisted Tisdall's logic is.
The postwar settlement rightfully returned Taiwan to Chinese sovereignty. But war-like Japan is challenging this post-war order.
Russia is a different kettle of fish---a Chinese ally simply because "my enemy's enemy is my friend". Russia is China's escape from US encirclement. Ditto the South China Sea. The US has its Monroe Doctrine. Shouldn't China be entitled to keep its coastal passage danger-free too?
China is on its defensive crouch and at peace. The US, by contrast, has its itchy finger in every pie.
To hardcore critics, every move China makes looks murky; even building a bigger embassy for its bigger footprint looks ugly.
Tisdall advises Starmer to hug friends close. Except Britain has few friends left.
He pushes a leverage-lacking Britain to stand tough against China, calling it a predator. But "pesky" China has lifted 800 million Chinese out of poverty—a monumental achievement Tisdall has never acknowledged.
The communist label is China's original sin, on which to nail China to the cross.
No longer a prime mover. The choice before Britain: either be America's fool or tool, or a partner to a major power that refuses to play the zero-sum game. Armchair critics like Tisdall might get a 10 out of 10 for hyperbole and hypocrisy, but he is adrift without a moral compass.
After Brexit, Britain faces a future where the English Channel looks deeper than the Atlantic pond. If Britain goes "eeny, meeny, miny moe" in seeking friendships, don't expect to "catch a tiger by the toe."
The views do not necessarily reflect those of DotDotNews.
Read more articles by Philip Yeung:
Opinion | Who is the paper tiger now: US or China?
Comment