02 February, 2010

Akmal Shaikh, Britain’s Double Standards, and Lessons for India


 The execution of a Britain in China for Drug Smuggling raises some interesting questions

Recently the news was packed with what they called the execution by the Chinese Government of a "mentally ill" Britain,. He was caught carrying 4 kgs of heroin in China. His family (surprise surprise!) said that he was mentally ill. And then human rights groups, that are always more than ready to jump in on denouncing China, picked it up.

Much has been written about this story, with some citing it as yet another example of China's "increased confidence" and "muscle flexing"; and the more paranoid even saying that ‘the Chinese government didn’t need to know’ that he was mentally ill, and only used Akmal Shaikh as a scapegoat to ‘keep the memory of those outrages (the Opium Wars) afresh’. That article even goes on to say that it arrested four more drug smugglers "to show that it had no regrets"! Maybe the author (Isaac Stone Fish) desired that since China has sentenced one drug smuggler to death, it should stop arresting others!
After defeating China in the Opium Wars, Britain forced China to lift the ban on the import of Opium, which was until then illegal in China; but legal in Britain. This event is still taught to every Chinese schoolchild as a reminder of China’s ‘humiliation’ at the hands of western colonial powers.

Stories apart, what really stuck me was the fact that not only did a majority of Chinese citizens actually support Shaikh’s execution, so did most comments on many international websites.

Double Standards

While some might argue that the death penalty is immoral, a closer look reveals the British Government’s double standards over human-rights issues. For example, it has refrained from criticizing the US over the death penalty. It should be noted that the US is still one of the few countries left to execute mentally ill persons. It abolished the execution of children as early as 2005. Then there is the case of Guantanamo detainee Moazzam Begg, also British, who was held in illegal US detention centers and allegedly tortured for more than two years before being released without charge.

Gary McKinnon, a British citizen is accused of hacking into the Pentagon’s computers. Now what is interesting is that he is autistic. His mother says that according to medical reports by top experts in the world, Gary will undoubtedly commit suicide if extradited.

Lessons for India

This incident might hold some valuable lessons for the Indian government, that very often succumbs to the demands of Western countries on many issues. It agreed to "slightly amend" visa rules (after first tightening them) possibly because the US and UK government protested. More recently, it kept largely quiet after India was snubbed at the London Conference on Afghanistan due to a difference of opinion with western countries. Contrast this with China, whose vice Foreign minister called US envoy on climate "extremely irresponsible or lacking in common sense". Such strong statements are literally heresy for Indian officials, except maybe when directed against Pakistan.



(update: this post also featured on Fool's Mountain. Permanent link here, along with the readers' comments and discussions)

14 comments:

  1. Hi Akmal,

    This seems to be your first post. I certainly have never seen a blog soley on India-China. Keep up the good work and I'll come back regularly.

    greg

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hi greg and Thanks for the comment.
    BTW, my name is not Akmal, it was the name of the drug smuggler!

    Maitreya

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Maitreya,

    Sorry about the mistake. Sincere apology from me!

    Greg

    ReplyDelete
  4. Hi Maitreya,

    Thought I drop you a note to say you have an interesting take on India, China, and their relation to the world. Please keep it up and we will be adding you to our reading list.

    regards,
    DeWang

    http://blog.hiddenharmonies.org

    ReplyDelete
  5. You opinions are very objective. I am an Chinese American and have a quite few Inidan friends. I really think China and India can learn and help each other.

    keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  6. @Dewang , @(Anonymous)

    Thanks for your comments.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Hi Maitreya,

    I agree with you on Britain's double standards. It always had a soft corner for US (US uska baap hai). It dare not say anything against US.

    Concerning the present case of the hanging of the drug smuggler who was probably mentally ill, we will never know whether he was or not mentally ill. It would have been better if Chinese authorities would have allowed doctors to examine him and testify, but given China's secrecy on most matters, that would have been called meddling into its internal affairs.

    Regarding US doing the same thing, well it should be criticized for it then. But if China thus the same thing, it should be criticized too. Just because US does and escapes criticism, doesnt mean China has the freedom to do something which is obviously wrong.

    Regarding India learning the lesson. Well yes, India do needs to stand up against the west more often for itself. However, the 'visa issue' I personally feel is blown out of proportion. After the Headley scare, India as a 'knee-jerk reaction' toughened the laws a bit too much. The western authorities demanded a re-think and some relaxation to reduce the inconveniences of travellers and the Indians relented. I dont read too much into it and see it as routine diplomacy. But then it is my personal view.

    ReplyDelete
  8. @mudit
    Thanks for commenting.

    "we will never know whether he was or not mentally ill"

    True. While the family says that he was mentally ill (no surprises there), the Chinese government says that since there was no evidence of mental illness, there was no need to conduct a physical examination. Take your pick.
    Personally I'm not sure that the Chinese government would take the risk of hanging a foreign citizen unless it was absolutely sure that he was guilty.


    "Just because US does and escapes criticism, doesn't mean China has the freedom to do something which is obviously wrong"

    As I said above, in this particular case, China is not obviously wrong. But in general, I agree with you.
    While it is true that China shouldn't get away with doing wrong things simply because other governments have done it, it is also true that those other governments have no right to criticise China for doing them (for example on certain arms sales or doing business with African dictatorships etc).

    ReplyDelete
  9. @ Maitreya

    you say 'those other governments have no right to criticise China for doing them (for example on certain arms sales or doing business with African dictatorships etc)'

    they may not have the right. But someone does need to criticize whatever wrong China or for that matter the west may be doing. If the west is criticizing some wrong doing of China, why should we complain?

    We do not have the guts to openly criticize China, so lets not stop the west when it is criticizing China. In the same way, we should not stop China when it is criticizing the west. Let us win in the fight of two hypocritic regimes. Why to meddle in the fight of two bullies?

    ReplyDelete
  10. @mudit

    "someone does need to criticize whatever wrong China or for that matter the west may be doing"

    I think that international organisations like the UN or WTO might be the appropriate forum for that.


    "If the west is criticizing some wrong doing of China, why should we complain?
    We do not have the guts to openly criticize China, so lets not stop the west when it is criticizing China"


    If by 'we' you mean the Indian government, then I totally agree with you.

    ReplyDelete
  11. UN or WTO? they r puppet organizations of US and EU

    no one takes them seriously anymore. did Israel stop Palestine's suppression on UN plea? did US listen to UN objections on Iraq war? even the weak Myanmar laughs on UN pleas of release of its opposition leader

    by 'we', I meant the Indian government and its intellectuals

    ReplyDelete
  12. The WTO is the appropriate forum for issues like trade disputes, protectionist measures etc. For example, when many western nations imposed anti-dumping duties against Chinese made products; China approached the WTO. Plaints are regularly filed at the WTO by many nations.

    The UN, I agree, is quite another matter. It has been reduced to being largely symbolic. But still, as I said earlier, it is sometimes a more appropriate forum, but not necessarily an influential one.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Hi Maitreya,

    I like your blog. Very informative. Your views are so Chinese like. I am kind of suspicious that you are actually Chinese pretending to be a Indian. Please help me dispel this impression by telling a little bits about yourself.

    Regards,
    Michael

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hi Michael,

    Thanks for commenting.
    My views are not 'Chinese like', but rather based on facts and evidence. Just because someone forms an opinion based on factual evidence, and in this case, if the opinion turns out to be in China's favour, doesn't mean that that person is Chinese 'pretending' to be someone else!
    Try to keep an open mind.

    ReplyDelete

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...