Recently, because of two photographs, China and Australia have engaged in a war of words. While two sides trade blows, the origin of the incident is lost in all the cacophony.

On November 30, Zhao Lijian, a spokesperson of China’s Foreign Ministry, posted on Twitter a photograph of an Australian soldier putting a knife at the throat of a child from Afghanistan. Zhao said, “We strongly condemn such acts, call for holding them accountable.” Hua Chunying, another spokesperson, criticized Australia for “killing innocent people”. The Australian government was enraged. Australian Prime Minister Scott Morrison lashed out at China, saying that it should feel ashamed for using a fake photograph in a tweet. It demanded an apology and the tweet’s removal. Hitting back at China, the Daily Telegraph, an Australian newspaper, published a photograph of “Tank Man” in the Tiananmen incident on its front page on December 1 together with words of condemnation like those of Zhao. It also stressed the authenticity of the photograph.

Things have so developed that the Chinese and Australian governments are sticking to their respective versions of the incident, and there is not an overlap between them. But is it really because of miscommunication between the two sides? Or is it because of some hidden motive of the Chinese government?

First, the most straightforward interpretation of the incident is that the Beijing authorities made such a move to embarrass Australia, and that the latest move was the continuation of a string of actions to “fix” Australia. Ever since Australia suggested an investigation into the origin of COVID-19 in the World Health Assembly (WHA) in April this year, relations between the two countries have deteriorated rapidly. From raw materials, agricultural products, beef, red wine to lobsters, Australian imports into China have been subjected to heightened tariffs, tougher quarantine requirements, delays in transportation into ports and other kinds of unnecessary difficulties and obstacles. China and Australia have also clashed on the issue of Hong Kong, freedom of the press, Chinese students studying in Australia and other issues. It follows that Zhao’s tweet is just a “side dish” aimed to deliberately incur Australia’s displeasure.

However, Zhao’s and Hua’s behavior was very unusual if considered from the perspective of international human rights politics.

Just days ago, the Australian government began a follow-up judicial process on the Australian special forces’ war crimes perpetrated by serving and retired soldiers who were stationed in Afghanistan between 2009 and 2013. All aspects of the incident, including the Australian government taking the initiative to launch the investigation, it exposing the unlawful behavior of its soldiers stationed abroad, it taking necessary administrative disciplinary action before a legal procedure is launched, and the chief of the Australian Defense Force saying that every senior of the soldiers involved in the murder cases will be held to account, accord with what is expected of a country which respects human rights and which reflects on its wrongdoings.

Exactly because of this, even though all sides have condemned the incident, they have not further criticized the Australian government’s effort it has made so far. This makes Zhao’s tweet look incongruous, as it gives the impression that China was the country that exposed the wrongdoing, and Australia was unrepentant. But in fact, Australia has been investigating the case for years. As far as I know, China has never said anything about the incident in the past.

Furthermore, Hua’s comment was typical mudslinging. Not only did she fail to make any clarification on Morrison’s accusation of a fake photograph, but she also employed sophistry to leave those familiar with the incident with the wrong impression that Australia was denying the unlawful killings. Judging from China’s years-long experience in the arena of international human rights politics, it is difficult for us to say that such actions were execution-related mistakes or the result of a lack of experience.

Then what is the objective of Beijing? I believe there are several possibilities. First, China is executing a strategy, and the aim is to change the game rules of international human rights politics. It seeks to change its position from a defendant (the accused) to a prosecutor. It is trying to claim the high ground and dominate the discussions about human rights. True, it is difficult for the international community to accept China as the standard-bearer for human rights today. But as time goes by, who can say that we will not mistake the poacher for the gamekeeper? If China indeed succeeds, it will be able to profess its theory of “relative human rights” with no qualms and deny the legitimacy of the international community’s criticism.

Second, if this strategy does not succeed, it can, through the manipulation of fake information in the process, bring about a serious impact on the cause of human rights in the international arena. It is because to promote the ideal of human rights, it is necessary to rely on trustworthy information for prescriptive demands to be made and popular support to be mobilized. If such a mechanism is distorted or polluted by fake information, the reputation of human rights advocates or even the entire human rights network will be harmed seriously. People’s innocent support for human rights can easily turn into indifference under the influence of fake and distracting information. The collapse of multinational human rights mechanisms is exactly what a human rights abuser wants to see.

Lastly, China’s criticism of Australian troops’ human rights abuses in Afghanistan gives us the impression that it has bigger fish to fry. After the 911 attacks, the US devoted its entire resources to the war against terrorism. It even perpetrated human rights abuses domestically and abroad, which not only lent credence to the criticism of the US’s double standards, but also greatly weakened the global human rights movement.

The US is still extremely protective of the actions taken by its troops outside the US. However, the US forces’ alleged infringement of international humanitarian law is a bone of contention between the International Criminal Court and the US government. As long as China is not completely beaten in this mudslinging campaign, the preposterous sight of Zhao and Hua sternly condemning other nations for human rights abuses might become an everyday occurrence.

(Yen Yung-Ming is an associate professor at the Department of Political Science of Tunghai University.)

Click here for Chinese version

We invite you to join the conversation by submitting columns to our opinion section: [email protected]

Apple Daily reserves the right to refuse, abridge, alter or edit guest opinion columns for accuracy, length, clarity, and style, and the right to withdraw and withhold columns based on the discretion of our editorial page editors.

The opinions of the writers do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the editorial board.

---------------------------------

Apple Daily’s all-new English Edition is now available on the mobile app: bit.ly/2yMMfQE

To download the latest version,

iOS: bit.ly/AD_iOS

Android: bit.ly/AD_android

Or search Appledaily in App Store or Google Play