Comments on Greg Sheridan “Big risk in nasty business”, 10/07/2009, http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,25197,25759154-5013460,00.html
Mr Sheridan, do you believe in the rule of laws at all? What evidence do you have that the arrest does have no basis and is what you said is “Cold War rhetoric and indeed Cold War impulses”? Shouldn’t you at least allow the event to play out and show that the arrest was not done according to the rule of laws?
You are spreading the fear that this arrest will do lasting harm to China's interests, not only in Australia, but throughout the Western world. From your attitude, why do or should you need to worry whether China’s interest is to be harmed or not? It that your business?
It is true that Rio is a large mining company. But does that mean that if any of its employees has done something unlawful they should not be dealt with by the law? What logic is yours on this?
You say that “there is an air of contempt in the way the Chinese authorities have failed to respond to Australian government requests for information and for consular access to MrHu until today”. Did the Chinese violate any agreement with Australian on this?
I don’t know what Mr Hu has done in terms of the Chinese accusations (for that matter you are unlikely to know either), but they did say something about it. Given the matter should be dealt with properly according to the law, why should the Rudd government secure Mr Hu's release within a few days? Would that be an act in the spirit of the rule of laws?
Don’t you need to reflect on what your bully tactics to other nations you don’t like?