简体中文
By APD Writer Wang Peng
July 1 marks the 20th anniversary of Hong Kong’s return to China. People in both Chinese mainland and Hong Kong are immersing themselves in the sea of happiness and proudness.
However, to the other side of the Eurasian Continent, the United Kingdom, the former suzerain of Hong Kong, seems to get into trouble.
‘Thank Goodness’, May has ample reasons to pray and celebrate after the vote of British MPs.
As many experts said the fragile government of British Prime Minister Theresa May has had its legislative plans approved by MPs, who approved the ruling Conservatives’ proposals by 323 votes to 309.
This happy result came days after May’s minority government struck a deal with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) to support the Conservatives in certain votes.
As British politics observers argued, this measure would backed up them to win enough votes to pass May’s program, especially after the negative waving made by May’s lose in her Conservative Party’s parliamentary majority in the election on June 8, as well as Queen Elizabeth’s speech last week.
Considering all these difficulties above, May is lucky enough to maintain her power from the MPs.
However, those opposition parties may not give May the chance. Rather, they proposed to utilize every opportunity to strike the Conservatives.
For example, the issue of anti-terrorism and deteriorating public security is one toolkit for May’s rivals. Following recent terrorist attacks in the UK, Theresa May vowed to take a tougher stance against extremism.
But everyone, including the opposition parties, has noticed that during Queen Elizabeth’s speech last week, May’s promised legislation to deny extremists 'Safe Spaces Online' has been relegated to a ‘non-legislative measure’. Why does the UK make such an adjustment? A possible reason is that the Queen is trying to keep the gravity and flexibility of the UK government.
Withdrawing the security a little bit from May’s tough and hawkish stand may leave a larger room for the country to unite different racial groups within its boundary.
However, now we have witnessed that some oppositions have already taken this point as a weapon to challenge May’s security policy.
The result is unclear yet, but they have made troubles for May to deal with.
Another fundamental question is how is this change likely to impact Britain's counter-terrorism efforts? A possible answer is that this may increase the uncertainty of Britain’s counter-terrorist war.
There are too many minds about the issue of anti-terrorist war in the UK, as well as in many other European countries.
The right side hold a tough attitude toward the outsiders, new comers, especially those from Middle East.
By contrast, the left camp insists the traditional ‘political correctness’ on this issue. Those conflicts may widen the already existed social gap in the UK.
What is more, the latest terrorist attack in London was not launched by migrants/refugees from Middle East, or their dependents, but a local, native white British mid-aged male civilian.
No doubt, his illegal retaliation against the local Muslims has opened the Pandora box of British domestic security.
Both the native British civilians and local Muslims will be the victims of the deteriorating vicious circle.
In sum, it is really a piece of good news for May who can maintain her power. However, in the mid-term and long run, maintaining the prime minister’s power is much easier than saving a declining country.
May should bear it in her mind. In such situation, conducting intervention of a former colony thousands miles away imprudently just in order to maintain the so called ‘imperial fame and legacy’ is not only stupid and rude, but also irresponsible for the British people.
Dr. Wang Peng, Research Fellow at Charhar Institute, Lecturer at the China Institute of Fudan University.
(ASIA PACIFIC DAILY)
