from ryanerwin.com
Britain is expressing outrage at the execution today of Akmal Shaikh, one of its citizens. Notwithstanding the human tragedy that this represents, this reaction seems to me to reflect a failure of historical memory. We none of us easily forget humiliations that we have suffered, and the Chinese have not forgotten the Opium Wars. In that shameful episode, Britain, shelled Chinese cities (the origin of the term ‘gunboat diplomacy’, I think – and, if not, certainly a good example of it) when the Chinese authorities attempted to fight against the opium addiction that was spreading like a plague through its people. This drug trade was deliberately foisted on the Chinese by the British as a way of balancing their balance of trade deficit with China (who, uninterested in European products, refused to take anything in exchange for her exports except silver – a constant drain of the metal that was ruining the British Empire). As a consequence of this bullying, China was forced to open herself up to European traders and, further, those traders were granted extraterritoriality – that is, they were immune to Chinese law – irrespective of what crimes they might commit in China…
Armed with this knowledge, it seems to me that the Akmal Shaikh tragedy takes on a different hue. Here we have a British drug smuggler convicted by Chinese law of bringing heroine into China. Heroine, a modern and more potent version of opium. And, Britain, is wanting China to suspend its laws in this case. I am saying nothing whatsoever about whether I consider the penalty under Chinese law for drug smuggling to be reasonable. What I am saying is that, in the historical context, the Chinese position is not uncomplicated…
