By Liang Xiao
Prince William recently found himself in hot water following his allegedly “tone-deaf” and “racist” comments about the ongoing conflict in Ukraine during a visit to a Ukrainian cultural center in London. Social media exploded in controversy with users—respected royal reporters included—branding the royal everything from a “white colonizer” to an “ignorant racist.” According to reports at the time, he had been overheard calling the situation “alien,” as the British public is “more used to seeing conflict in Africa and Asia.”
But since the outbreak of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, several Western reporters have voiced similar opinions, implying that war and violence are the preserve of the Third World. “This isn’t a place, with all due respect, like Iraq or Afghanistan. This is a relatively civilized, relatively European city,” said a CBS senior correspondent in Kiev—live on air. A Daily Telegraph columnist wrote, “This time, war is wrong because the people look like us and have Instagram and Netflix accounts. It is not in a poor, remote country anymore.”
With over 3 million Ukrainian refugees fleeing the war, according to the International Organization for Migration on March 16, the governments and people of the EU are welcoming them with open arms—as long as they can prove their nationality. This is a far cry from their previous treatment of African and Middle Eastern refugees. Since 2015, more than 6 million Syrian refugees have tried to enter EU countries, but extremely strict border controls prevent them from succeeding.
But when it came to the Ukrainians, Bulgarian Prime Minister Kiril Petkov stressed that “these are not the refugees we are used to… these people are Europeans.” UK government officials recently lifted the cap on the number of Ukrainian refugees who can reside with host families; hosts will receive 350 pounds ($450) a month from the government in return. But according to The Independent, “hundreds [of Syrian refugees] told they could have sanctuary as long ago as 2018, are still waiting, living in increasing desperation.” This preferential treatment of Ukrainian refugees arguably comes with a seemingly “white preference,” hinting Ukrainians are more “noble” than Africans or Asians.
Western society’s quick response to the Ukraine crisis stands in sharp contrast to its attitude regarding wars and humanitarian crises in developing countries. These often remain selectively ignored, even though they, ironically so, often stem from West-initiated wars such as those with Syria or Iraq.
On the issue of the non-white refugees, Western society was not as welcoming. The double standard raises concerns of “neo-orientalism,” which depicts the East as an exotic, violent or backwards society. The boundaries of the “orient” have actually never been determined; from the initial Middle East and North Africa, the term now seems to cover almost all of Asia and Africa, not to mention its so-called trans-Pacific variety: Latin American orientalism. Even Russia has been included on the list—for geopolitical reasons.
It is true that Ukraine geographically belongs to Europe; physically, most Ukrainians are similar in appearance to the vast majority of Europeans; and many share the same faith. It is also human nature to have more empathy for ethnicities similar to oneself.
However, the overemphasis on the European ancestry and white identity of Ukrainians is a betrayal of the universal values of freedom and racial equality. In the 21st century, this is no longer a sign of acceptable pride; it’s unacceptable prejudice. -The Daily Mail-Beijing Review News Exchange Item
