Japanese people are reputed to be insular, xenophobic and egomaniacal. To safeguard its national esteem and pride, the Japanese usually are reluctant to accept any assistance from neighboring powers such as China, the United States and Russia, even in the midst of a series of calamities.

A case in the point is the Japanese government's initial refusal to accept all offers of international relief work during the tsunami and nuclear disaster of 2011. Its indifference to the international offers immediately prompted many foreign journalists and broadcasters rightly to criticize the Japanese Prime Minister, Nato Kan, for putting national esteem before the well-being of the victims. Bowing to immense international pressure, Kan eventually decided to receive only limited foreign aid.

Unfortunately, it was during the Lamma ferry disaster that Hong Kong opposition lawmakers, radical social activists and anti-Beijing broadcasters revealed that they are much more insular, egomaniacal and inhumane than the Japanese government. These anti-Beijing radicals not only unreasonably rejected the offer of disaster aid from our motherland, but also capitalized on this tragedy to launch an attack on the Liaison Office of the central government and Chief Executive CY Leung in most unethical ways.

Their criticisms could be summed up as baseless and absurd. First, some opposition lawmakers such as Lee Cheuk-yan have ruthlessly denounced the offer of deployment of rescue ships from the deputy head of the Liaison Office, Li Gang, during the tragedy as interference in Hong Kong's internal affairs. Meanwhile, Crystal Chow, a young social activist, has even distorted the truth in her newspaper column, implying that the Liaison Office is no different from foreign consular offices in Hong Kong; therefore, it was improper for Li, like other foreign diplomats, to offer assistance to Hong Kong people.

Ignorant about international politics and contemptuous of the Basic Law, these anti-Beijing radicals' views, especially Chow's, are extremely misleading to youngsters. As I pointed out at the beginning of this article, it is very usual and reasonable for such global powers as China to offer aids to any disaster-stricken countries. Since 2003, China has sent rescuers to Japan, Indonesia, Pakistan, Algeria, Iran and Haiti etc. More importantly, by law, the Liaison Office is not a foreign consular office, but an organ of the central government in Hong Kong and Hong Kong is a part of Chinese sovereign territory. So what is wrong with our motherland's offer of disaster aid to us?

Second, some anti-Beijing broadcasters misrepresented Leung's immediate presence on the scene of the ferry disaster as political grandstanding. A telling example is Albert Cheung, a well-known radio broadcaster, who said that by going to the scene of the ferry disaster, Leung "gave the impression that it was all a show... His presence there contributed nothing except possibly causing inconvenience to staff who were trying to deal with an emergency."

Cheung's accusation is equally unfounded and unsubstantial. According to Leung, for fear of causing a disturbance to the rescuing teams at sea, he just got to the pier to be more knowledgeable about the accident. Obviously, his presence at the pier did not disrupt the rescue operation at sea at all. Nor did Leung's later visit to the injured at the hospital impede medical surgeries at the emergency units.

An important fact which Cheung may have overlooked is that immediate arrivals and offers of press conferences on the scene of disasters are a common and proper practice for leaders around the globe. It is the onerous duty of government heads to rush to the stricken area immediately, assuming the command and co-coordinating rescue operations of different kinds. For instance, this summer, in the wake of Colorado wild fires, US President Barack Obama immediately travelled to the fire-plagued areas to receive an update on the disaster and, above all, express his sympathy for the victims through a local press conference. Unlike Leung's, Obama's prompt visit to the ravaged area and his concern about the extent of the damage was well-received in the United States.

Another more revealing example were the Sept 11 attacks. Shortly after the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani rushed to the site of the collapsing twin towers to provide guidance and advice to the rescuing teams. That day, he also made frequent appearances on radio and television to allay public anxiety and fear. His leadership on the scene of the disaster has been widely credited as the best example of crisis management of the 21st century.

By the global standard, it is not noisome that political leaders such as our Chief Executive gave a speech on the scene of disaster or at hospitals to allay public anxiety. It is not noisome that such a global power as China offered disaster aid to its own city, Hong Kong. But, it is noisome and tragic that such anti-Beijing radicals used the ferry tragedy to slander their government and motherland at the expense of victims' well-being.

The author is a lecturer at Hong Kong Polytechnic University and a Yau Tsim Mong District Councillor.

(HK Edition 10/11/2012 page3)