UK politicians live in a parallel universe

“The UK is now a harder target for those states who seek to conduct hostile acts against the UK, which include espionage, foreign interference (including in our political system), sabotage, and acts that endanger life, such as assassination,” the UK’s Home Office declared in a recently released statement introducing the country’s National Security Bill, which became law on July 11 after being passed by both Houses of Parliament and securing royal assent.

At about the same time, some UK government officials and politicians, who seem to be living in a parallel universe, criticized the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) implemented three years ago and the Hong Kong Police Force’s recent enforcement action of offering a HK$1-million ($128,000) reward for information leading to the arrest of each of eight individuals who have left the city and are wanted for alleged offenses endangering national security under the NSL.

British politicians have repeatedly demonstrated conspicuous double standards in pounding on the NSL since its enactment in June 2020. But the hypocrisy they revealed in their latest attack on the NSL immediately after the enactment of the UK’s own National Security Bill is particularly glaring.  

The eight individuals put on a wanted list by the Hong Kong police have openly campaigned for Western countries to harm the Hong Kong judiciary by imposing sanctions on the city’s judges and prosecutors, attempted to undermine Hong Kong’s economy and status as an international financial center for trade, finance and logistics by urging Washington to scrap Hong Kong’s preferential trade status, or tried to subvert China’s State power by advocating separatist ideas.

“We call on Beijing to remove the national security law and for the Hong Kong authorities to end their targeting of those who stand up for freedom and democracy,” said UK Foreign Secretary James Cleverly in response to the Hong Kong police’s enforcement action against the eight individuals. 

Obviously, Cleverly defines “foreign interference” and acts of collusion with foreign governments to hurt Hong Kong and subverting China’s State power as “freedom and democracy”. The UK’s Home Office obviously disagrees on that, as its statement hailing the enactment of UK’s National Security Bill specifically noted: “For the first time there is an offence of foreign interference … which means the UK will be better equipped to tackle the full spectrum of malign activity.”

One can’t help but conclude that there are two definitions for each of “freedom”, “democracy”, “rights” and “foreign interference” — one for China and the other for Western countries.

The author is a current affairs commentator.

The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.