A video grab from footage broadcast by the UK Parliament's Parliamentary Recording Unit (PRU) shows Britain's Home Secretary Priti Patel (right) reacting as Britain's opposition Labour Party's shadow Home Secretary Yvette Cooper speaks during a statement concerning the government's plan to send migrants and asylum seekers who cross the Channel to Rwanda in the House of Commons in London on June 15, 2022. Photo: AFP

The news that the United Kingdom will be sending foreign asylum seekers to Rwanda has sparked controversies globally and specially raised concerns among people - many are secessionists - who chose to move to the UK from China's Hong Kong. Many of them have openly condemned the plan fearing they would be the next to be sent from the UK to Rwanda.

Some netizens in Hong Kong and the mainland said that secessionists in Hong Kong who used to boast about the "help" they got from the UK to move to the country now see how fragile such help is.

The UK's first flight to take foreign asylum seekers to Rwanda did not take off as scheduled after the European human rights court issued last-minute injunctions to stop the deportation. The plan has been heavily criticized for being "inhumane" but the UK government insists the policy is needed to stop a flood of refugees and migrants. 

The Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) has repeatedly pointed out that the move is unlawful and that people should not be "traded like commodities," urging the UK to "re-think the plans."

The UK has long portrayed itself as a defender of human rights and regularly criticizes other countries regarding their domestic affairs in the name of human rights. However, when it comes to its own refugee and migrant issues, the UK chooses to be oblivious to the human rights standards and humanitarianism, shies away from responsibilities, and even tries to "outsource" the asylum-seekers, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Wang Wenbin told a press conference on June 14.

"The UK government needs to ditch its arrogance and hypocrisy on human rights issues, and take serious actions to respond to the criticism and questioning from home and abroad," said Wang. 

Some people who moved from Hong Kong to the UK called on more people to sign a petition on change.org to oppose the UK's plan, and said "we don't want people from Hong Kong to become such refugees, who will be deported to Rwanda." 

Some netizens from Hong Kong said they wish the UK government would pay more attention to migrants from Hong Kong than refugees from Afghanistan and Syria. One netizen even wrote that the UK government should know that the migrants from Hong Kong are "valuable talents." 

Such moves by the migrants from Hong Kong have drawn attention from both Hong Kong and the mainland. Some netizens criticized the UK government for violating refugees' human rights by going against their will and sending them to Rwanda and some noted that such plans exposed the hypocrisy of the UK government for adopting such method to deal with refugees and migrants but on the other hand claiming to "help" Hong Kong residents who possess British National (Overseas) [BN(O)] passports to leave Hong Kong. 

In June 2020, after the national security law for Hong Kong was approved, the UK threatened to open a new channel for Hong Kong residents to enter the UK to study and work and eventually apply for British citizenship. However, BN(O) passport holders "can stay in the UK as a visitor for up to six months without a visa," but they are "subject to immigration control and, as a visitor, do not have the right to live, work or take up long-term study" in the country. 

One Hong Kong netizen commented that the UK government now takes action on refugees from Afghanistan and Syria, and tomorrow it may take similar actions on people from Hong Kong. "Maybe secessionists from Hong Kong who used to boast about the help from the West may meet in Rwanda in the future," wrote the netizen.

Global Times