China Defends Diplomats ‘Daring to Fight’ After U.K. Consulate Brawl

China’s state-run Global Times on Friday waded into the controversy over Chinese diplomats assaulting a Hong Kong democracy protester at the Chinese consulate in Manchester, Britain, sweeping aside Beijing’s previous denials to argue the consulate staff was entirely justified in beating up a pesky dissident.

The Global Times approvingly quoted Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs Ma Zhaoxu insisting that “daring to fight and being good at fighting are the fine traditions and distinctive features of China’s diplomacy.”

“On the new journey, China’s diplomacy will continue to carry forward the fighting spirit, improve fighting skills, and always stand at the forefront of safeguarding national interests and dignity,” Ma continued in what the Global Times hailed as a “powerful” statement.

The Chinese Communist paper then railed against foreigners for mocking China’s “wolf warrior” diplomacy:

The press center for the 20th National Congress of the Communist Party of China (CPC) hosted the fourth press conference Thursday, expounding the Party’s foreign work in the new era and major-country diplomacy with Chinese characteristics. When answering a question from a Global Times reporter about how China’s diplomacy reflects a fighting spirit in safeguarding national sovereignty, security and development interests, Ma Zhaoxu, member of the CPC Committee of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Vice Minister of Foreign Affairs, said that daring to fight and being good at fighting are the fine traditions and distinctive features of China’s diplomacy. On the new journey, China’s diplomacy will continue to carry forward the fighting spirit, improve fighting skills, and always stand at the forefront of safeguarding national interests and dignity, he added. These words are powerful and will help deepen the outside world’s comprehensive understanding of China’s diplomacy in the new era.

Since the 18th National Congress of the CPC, “fighting” has increasingly become a high-frequency word and keyword in China’s diplomacy, and it is also a word that has been misunderstood a lot by the outside world. US and Western public opinion has labeled China’s diplomacy such as “wolf warrior”, as one of the foot notes to hype the so-called China threat theory. They deliberately distort the fighting spirit of China’s diplomacy, and by distorting the concept, they try to turn it from China’s just act of defending the country’s dignity and interests, as well as international rules and principles, into an aggressive and destructive diplomatic symbol. Washington even wants to label China with which itself deserves.

Why does China’s diplomacy stress the fighting spirit? The reason is obvious. Those forces who smear and accuse China’s diplomatic efforts of so-called “wolf warrior,” are actually “evil wolves” themselves. Look at the US warships and warplanes which frequently provoke in the waters around China, and the suppressive measures aiming at containing China that Washington launched one after another, the collusion between separatists and external forces, and certain developed countries try to gang up internationally and restart the cold war. All this undoubtedly require China to carry out diplomatic fight.

“Obviously, we are fighting against words and deeds that harm China’s national interests and dignity, and against hegemonism and power politics,” the Global Times intoned.

“Wolf warrior” is a term deriving from a popular series of Chinese action movies that portray People’s Liberation Army (PLA) special operators as invincible supermen. The actual record of PLA forces against close-combat opponents is decidedly less impressive, but Chinese Communist apparatchiks have a tendency to get wildly overheated when fantasizing about the Wolf Warrior films.

The editorial also cited Huawei CEO and Communist Party princess Meng Wanzhou evading prosecution for financial fraud and sanctions defiance as a triumph of Chinese diplomacy’s “fighting spirit” — which in that case involved taking some innocent Canadians hostage and holding them prisoner until the Canadian government let Meng walk.

What the Global Times is bloviating about, as though it were a heroic victory against overwhelming odds, is a cowardly attack by Communist stooges against a lone Hong Kong pro-democracy protester named Bob Chan at the Chinese consulate in Manchester.

Chan told the BBC on Thursday he and a small group of protesters were exercising their free speech rights outside the consulate when a group of masked men poured out of the building, tore down protest banners, and dragged him inside the compound, where he was viciously beaten by a crowd of consulate thugs until a British cop was able to pull him back outside.

Chan said he tried to hold on to the consulate gates to keep himself from being dragged inside, but he was “kicked and punched” until his grip was broken.

“I was eventually pulled onto the ground of the consulate. I felt punches and kicks from several men. Other protesters were trying to get me out of this situation, but to no avail. The attack only stopped when a man who turned out to be a uniformed officer from the Greater Manchester Police pulled me outside the gates,” he said at a press conference organized by British lawmakers.

The Greater Manchester Police confirmed that a group of men emerged from the consulate to attack Chan and pull him inside for further abuse. The police also confirmed that their officers “intervened and removed the victim from the consulate grounds.”

“Let me say it again so I am clear: I was dragged into the consulate, I did not attempt to enter the consulate,” Chan emphasized.

The reason Chan felt this point needed repeating is that the Chinese Communist regime has been alternately claiming Chan broke into the consulate and was reluctantly subdued by terrified employees, and proudly boasting that its wolf warrior diplomats dragged him inside to give him the thrashing he deserved for insulting their regime and its ruler, dictator Xi Jinping (One of the protest signs pulled down by the goon squad was a picture of Xi wearing only an imperial crown and underwear).

When photos of Consul-General Zheng Xiyuan participating in the attack by pulling on Chan’s hair were published by British media, Zheng claimed he had a “duty” to rough Chan up because “the man abused my country, my leader.”

Outrage is building in the United Kingdom against China’s thuggery, and against British politicians who seem reluctant to punish China for it. Some of these critics feared the attack on Chan was only a taste of things to come since a large population of Hong Kongers fleeing Chinese tyranny has taken advantage of a new visa system to settle in the UK.

Nathan Law, a pro-democracy activist from Hong Kong who took asylum in the UK, said the Chan incident “puts a big question mark on the Hong Kong community” because Beijing’s thugs might decide to drag dissidents onto consular grounds for much worse than pummeling.

“Let me be clear: if the police determine there are grounds to charge any officials, we would expect the Chinese consulate to waive immunity for those officials. If they do not, then diplomatic consequences will follow,” British Foreign Office Minister Jesse Norman said on Thursday. Chinese rhapsodies about the glories of wolf warrior diplomacy, such as the Global Times piece on Friday, seem like a clear signal that no such cooperation with British law enforcement will be forthcoming.

“They don’t want to create a situation where an immediate, quick, strong response simply results in British citizens being taken hostage,” Steve Tsang of the SOAS China Institute at the University of London said to explain the British government’s cautious response to the Manchester beating – an especially pertinent observation given the Global Times’ trumpeting of the Meng Wanzhou case as a prime example of wolf warrior diplomacy.