A double standard is regarded by philosophers as a logical fallacy. The theory of double standards posits that individuals apply varying principles or rules to different individuals, groups and situations, leading to unfair or unequal treatment and inconsistent judgments. In response to the invasion of Gaza by Israel, activists organized anti-Israel protests in some American universities in 2024. These protests have attracted strong condemnation from some American politicians. Republican Senator Tom Cotton, for example, argued that the National Security Guard of the United States should “restore law and order” on these campuses. But in late 2019, he stood on the opposite side and condemned the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region government for taking law enforcement action to end the rioters’ occupation of the Hong Kong Polytechnic University campus during the height of the “black-clad riots”.
The US’ increasingly transparent double standards continue to weaken its global credibility, influence and soft power. According to an online think-piece dated Nov 3, 2023 in Time magazine, “America’s increasingly transparent double standards are losing the Global South.” In particular, the US has been criticized by many developing countries for providing weapons, intelligence and special forces for Israel to enable a scorched-earth siege of Gaza. The US also supported Israeli military action in Lebanon. Some human rights activists even call the US president “Genocide Joe”.
When we respond to American criticisms of the National Security Law for Hong Kong (NSL) and Washington’s attacks on Hong Kong’s legal system and human rights records, we should lift our assessment above the prejudicial reasoning deployed by these hypocritical double-standard holders. We start our discussion with the enactment of the Safeguarding National Security Ordinance (SNSO) in March 2024. The US State Department claimed that the ordinance could potentially accelerate the closing of Hong Kong’s once-open society. US politicians have relentlessly attacked the city’s national security regime. In response to such groundless accusations, the Commissioner’s Office of China’s Foreign Ministry in the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region said certain countries and politicians had turned a blind eye to their own nations’ extensive and stringent security laws.
According to former Hong Kong chief executive, Leung Chun-ying, Hong Kong’s domestic security legislation is milder than that of Singapore with “a world of difference” as the city’s independent Judiciary, rather than an executive body, will determine what amounts to external interference rather than an executive body (SCMP, Mar 9, 2024). The case of Philip Chan Man Ping, a businessman who was designated by the Singapore Ministry of Home Affairs as a “politically significant person” under the country’s Foreign Interference (Countermeasures) Act 2021, shows that the power in Singapore has been vested in a ministry, whereas the power under the SNSO and the NSL is vested in an independent judiciary, according to Leung. But Singapore’s security legislation has not sparked a storm of controversy in Western media.
Apart from taking unfriendly steps that have been disruptive to Sino-US relations, the US has undermined its credibility, soft power and moral authority in the international arena by using a narrative of double standards to defame China and its HKSAR. The price attached to the double-standard fallacy is too high to be borne by the US government
The “black-clad riots” of 2019 were the most violent and dangerous political movement that Hong Kong has seen since the 1967 riots. At the eye of the storm was an attempt by rioters to destabilize the HKSAR government. It was reported that former US House speaker Nancy Pelosi glorified the riots as the pursuit of democracy and freedom and as a “beautiful sight to behold”. And we cannot ignore the fact that some other US politicians have openly given support to the rioters.
The promulgation of the NSL in June 2020 enraged Washington. In addition to condemning the NSL, the US took hostile legislative and executive actions against Hong Kong. The Hong Kong Autonomy Act and Executive Order 13936 came about under Donald Trump’s administration, while Joe Biden’s administration has since followed suit with several hostile actions. The US has also criticized the legal actions against 47 individuals involved in the “35+” subversion case.
The imposition of harsh penalties on Capitol Hill rioters by American courts has exposed the US’ double standards. The American mainstream view is that harsh penalties should be imposed on rioters who have posed a threat to American security. Some Republicans share the same view.
More than 1,230 people have been charged with federal crimes for their involvement in the Capitol Hill riot of Jan 6, 2021, ranging from misdemeanor offenses to seditious conspiracy against the state. In May 2023, Stewart Rhodes, who is the founder of the Oath Keepers, was sentenced to 18 years’ imprisonment for terrorism-related seditious conspiracy. Another leader of the Oath Keepers, Kelly Meggs, was sentenced to 12 years in prison because he was charged with seditious conspiracy. Five members of the Proud Boys were also indicted for seditious conspiracy. Enrique Tarrio, the Proud Boys’ former national chairman, was imprisoned for 22 years for seditious conspiracy.
The discrepancy in American responses to the “Occupy Wall Street” movement (OWS) in 2011-12 and the “Occupy Central” movement in Hong Kong in 2014 has launched the US on the road to becoming a sophistical country ingrained with a deep sense of hypocrisy. The OWS began in September 2011 when a group of peaceful protesters set up tents and lived in Lower Manhattan in New York City to show their distaste for economic inequality, corporate greed, big finance and the influence of money in politics. Similar protests involving small tent cities sprang up around the country. Some protesters also advocated the withdrawal of American military forces from Afghanistan and Iraq.
In mid-October 2011, the American police arrested some radical protesters and used anti-terrorist tactics to suppress them. The violent suppression has opened a painful chapter in American social movements. Unlike its hardline attitude toward local protesters in New York, the US adopted an accommodative attitude toward the “Occupy Central” protesters in Hong Kong. Regardless of the serious disruptions the “Occupy Central” movement caused to the Hong Kong economy and residents’ daily lives, the US voiced its support for the Hong Kong protesters’ right to protest for their political cause.
Apart from taking unfriendly steps that have been disruptive to Sino-US relations, the US has undermined its credibility, soft power and moral authority in the international arena by using a narrative of double standards to defame China and its HKSAR. The price attached to the double-standard fallacy is too high to be borne by the US government.
Yin Zihan is a co-leader of Rainbow Pair mentorship Program launched and administered by Chinese Dream Think Tank.
Kacee Ting Wong is a barrister, part-time researcher of Shenzhen University Hong Kong and Macao Basic Law Research Center, chairman of Chinese Dream Think Tank and a district councilor.
The views do not necessarily reflect those of China Daily.
