French football star Griezmann announced Thursday that he would terminate his cooperation with Huawei on suspicion that Huawei may help develop a system through facial recognition software to “participate in the persecution” of Uighurs in Xinjiang.
A French star who has probably never been to Xinjiang has to “clear the line” Huawei in such a fierce way, showing how much labeling and smearing Huawei has reached in France and the West.
Nowadays, there is a wave of censorship against Xinjiang in the West. Almost all ties with Xinjiang have been questioned by “helping suppress Uighurs”. Not only are products from Xinjiang labeled as “forced labor”, but also the opening of branches in Xinjiang has been accused of “support for the suppression”.
The Chinese can clearly feel the paranoia and ridiculousness of this extreme trend. Griezmann’s appearance makes him look a little like a fooled “stupid sweet”. Where is Xinjiang described by Western public opinion? Violent terrorism there has been stopped, the economy is recovering, and the epidemic prevention situation is many times better than that of France.
Huawei is a great company. France now has no such cutting-edge high-tech company. Although Xinjiang and Huawei can find some problems, it is definitely not what Griezmann imagined.
There is also a double standard problem. If according to the strict “ethical standards” of the West, Intel and Nvidia, which have chips installed in the face recognition system in Xinjiang, should also be hit equally.
However, Western public opinion’s doubts about them are only a stroke, and Huawei and other Chinese companies have become Those targets where public opinion focuses on. The “morality” advocated by Western public opinion seems to be cosmetics specially designed for interests.
The United States’ suppression of Huawei has a clear geopolitical purpose, but anyone with some political acumen can clearly identify it.
However, many Western public opinion institutions have helped to implement the deep demonization of Huawei, using their seemingly “objective” way of discourse to first spread Huawei’s doubts about “gathering intelligence for the Chinese government”, and then turn such doubts into labels on Huawei. The Washington Post published a long report on Huawei’s “assistance in Xinjiang’s crackdown” on Tuesday, strengthening Huawei’s new charge.
Is Huawei that bad? Huawei publicly expressed its willingness to sign a “backdoorless” agreement with any country. Which big IT company in the United States is willing to sign such an agreement? Until today, the whole Western world has not produced any evidence of “gathering intelligence” by Chinese companies such as Huawei and Tiktok, but a large amount of personal data around the world is in the hands of American Internet companies.
The “Prisma Gate” incident exposed the tip of the iceberg of the United States’ monitoring world. Why do Western public opinion institutions have the courage? Follow the melons and expose the inside story of the U.S. government’s more surveillance of the world?
Western public opinion is a tiger in the face of China, and a pet cat in the face of the United States. The political persecution carried out by the United States against Huawei forged an unprecedented injustice against technology companies in human history.
The Western media not only did not bravely stand up to stop such perverse behavior, but also became an accomplice to the United States in encirclement and suppress Huawei. This cannot but be said to be a shame of Western public opinion.
Common sense and reason tell us that labeling can easily happen in the field of public opinion. As a complex power with rapid development, using the same technology as the West and inextricably linked to the West, China has not been involved in any war for decades.
Although it has different political systems and ideologies from the West, it cannot be the “dark country” described by some Western public opinion. There is a big problem with the West’s understanding of China, which will cause difficulties for China’s interaction with the West, but in the end, it is definitely the West itself that will suffer more from it.