British Prime Minister Criticized for Bowing to the CCP
Recently British Prime Minister David Cameron who enraged
the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) by meeting the Dalai Lama
last year arrived in Beijing leading a trade delegation.
This visit trigged a discussion of Western public opinion
on “Which Is More Important: Trade Or Human Rights?”
Many British media criticized Cameron’s bowing to the CCP
in order to chase economic interests whileremaining silent on
CCP violation of human rights.
His action to abandon universal values may not get the
CCP’s respect in return.
On December 2, British Prime Minister David Cameron arrived
in Beijing leading Britain’s largest trade delegation to begin a
three-day visit to China.
Chinese Premier Li Keqiang held a welcoming ceremony
and a press conference at the Great Hall.
U.S. news agency Bloomberg reporter was prohibited from
joining the press conference, and questions from a BBC
reporter were ignored.
Cameron told the British parliament – sending a message to
Bejing – that:"We recognize Tibet as part of China. We do
not support Tibetan independence."
Before his trip to China Cameron also repeatedly showed
friendship to the CCP and promised the UK would become
China’s strongest supporter in Europe.
Last May Cameron insisted his meeting with the exiled Tibetan
spiritual leader the Dalai Lama in spite of the CCP’s warnings
Cameron was condemned by the CCP, but he refused to give
the CCP their demanded public apology.
CCP mouthpiece Global Times warned Cameron
must “pay" for his behavior.
Accordingly soon after CCP not only reduced UK investment
but also refused Cameron’s request to visit China in H1.
It was reported as Germany and France both got economic and
trade orders from China, Cameron received huge pressure from
within the UK. So he made an effort to visit China to “defrost"
the China and UK relationship.
Analysts point out although Cameron did not make a public
apology, this trip has a lot to do with his compromises.
Commentator Zhang Tianliang: “The CCP has been using
economic interests to draw other countries.
In a democratic society, economic development is actually
a very important source of votes.
The CCP takes advantage of this vulnerability. If you yield to
it, it may give you some economic benefits."
UK’s Daily Telegraph, Daily Mirror and The Financial Times
all published articles critical of Cameron’s behavior to give up
The Daily Mail felt that: “We are in danger of adopting too
humble and unquestioning approach" to China by focusing
on trade not human rights."
The Financial Times also criticized:
“The answer, of course, is that abandoning the defence of
universal values in the hopes of more market access or better
political relations is an even less effective way of earning the
respect of China’s leaders or anyone else."
Zhang Tianliang: “In general, many leaders of democratic
countries, before they came to power, had very tough attitude
to the CCP because the CCP regime violates rule of law and
But once they are on the stage, they are much softer on the
issue of human rights as they have to consider economic
development and diplomatic relations."
A blog by the Telegraph pointed out that the UK is discarding
values in order to collect financing capital for infrastructure.
The article also indicated Cameron was attracted by China’s capital
and took the initiative to simplify the visa process for Chinese.
Zhang Tianliang said the CCP is actually weak.
It bullies the weak and is afraid of the strong.
He said that Canada has been seriously criticizing the CCP
on human rights issues over the years, but China has not
reduced trade with Canada.
So even if Cameron did not compromise,
the British economy would not be affected.
Interview & Edit/Zhang Tianyu Post-Production/ZhongYuan