LETTER | Criticism against Charles Santiago is unwarranted

LETTER | The Association for Community and Dialogue (Acid) is puzzled with the MCA central committee member Chew Kok Woh's criticism of DAP member of Parliament Charles Santiago for being a signatory together with 200 parliamentarians and policymakers from 23 countries which criticised China for proposing national security laws in Hong Kong.

It is obvious that Chew's thoughts stem from a typical MCA type of politics where business relationships triumph over human rights issues.

I would like to ask the MCA leader where he was when the US was negotiating a trans-pacific partnership agreement with Malaysia and other Asian countries during the Obama years where according to experts, the very nature of the bloc’s propose was to curb the rise of China.

The agreement could have contributed to the surrendering Malaysian national sovereignty to big American corporations and at the same time, strained economic relations with China. Charles Santiago was one of those MPs that stood against this proposed agreement.

The concern among conscientious human rights groups is not about China's rights to protect the integrity of its nation, but it is about how the Chinese government deals with dissent in its own mainland and how such practices could be exported to Hong Kong where its citizens have enjoyed the freedom that mainland does not.

One has to keep in mind that many prominent dissident Chinese intellectuals, religious leaders and those who articulate a different world view from the mainstream thoughts of the communist party have been jailed in mainland China over the decades through the reasoning that they are a threat to national security, when in fact their dissent is against the authoritarian regime’s world view and not the against the integrity and sovereignty of the country.

Having said that, one also needs to keep in mind the legitimate concern of China on foreign interference and instigation of Hong Kong citizens that could lead to a secessionist rebellion that would break up the motherland.

The current Trump administration has taken a cold war path towards China, and the security law could be used as a propaganda tool to discredit China's geopolitical aims. This is where the democratic activists in Hong Kong have made themselves vulnerable to Chinese security plans in Hong Kong.

It is obvious that signatures alone will not be effective. Global members parliamentarians should make it clear to Hong Kong activists that foreign government intervention to destabilise China is not acceptable, and authentic dialogue between the government of China and all stakeholders in Hong Kong should be encouraged based on the spirit of Hong Kong’s Basic Law. This should be the way forward where the twin evils of authoritarian rule and imperialism are opposed and at same time dialogue is initiated.

It’s time for MCA leaders to have some sense of political conscience in upholding human rights in the country and also globally. Charles Santiago has shown that he opposes authoritarianism and also economic imperialism over the years. What he needs to do with parliamentarians around the globe is to encourage dialogue between stakeholders in China and Hong Kong.

The writer is secretary, Association for Community and Dialogue.

The views expressed here are those of the author/contributor and do not necessarily represent the views of Malaysiakini.