The Odyssey - Democracy in Hong Kong

[amberjack1234]

Looks like it is getting serious. China "mainland" should honor their agreement when Hong Kong was returned to them. If it continues all the money will be sent out of the country as well as the millionaires and billionaires and all that will be left is more of what they have already. More poor people.

[Randy W]

An excellent article about the political truths Hong Kong is facing, from the SCMP.

 

The handwriting is not only on the wall, it is in their constitution - 2047.

 

Although the extradition bill IS shelved, like he points out, what is needed is better governance. If that comes about, then perhaps the protests WILL have achieved something.

 

Harsh truths for Hong Kong: extradition bill protests will not achieve anything

• Retired Singapore diplomat Bilahari Kausikan says Beijing will never tolerate any action that undermines national unity and the bill formalises ‘one country, two systems’
• Besides, what is really needed is good governance and a sensible housing policy – blame the tycoons for denying the city that

 

Bilahari Kausikan is the former permanent secretary of Singapore’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. This article first appeared in his Geo-Blog with Global Brief magazine (Toronto) –

www.globalbrief.ca

I can understand the disquiet of the Hong Kong people subject to a China that under Xi Jinping has increasingly stressed the control of the Communist Party over every sphere of life in China and not just in Hong Kong. But Hong Kong lost that battle before it even began.

Ever since the end of the Qing dynasty in the late 19th century, the legitimacy of Chinese governments – imperial, republican or communist – has rested on the ability to defend China’s sovereignty and its borders. I don’t think Beijing is eager to exercise direct control over Hong Kong. But the unity of China is not a matter on which any Chinese government will ever compromise.

The Hong Kong people, and the West generally, may have thought that the emphasis of the “one country, two systems” slogan lay on the second phrase. But for Beijing it was clearly always on one country. I shall not speculate about whether there was any real coincidence between what Britain’s leaders privately believed in 1997 and what they now say they believed.

Beijing was willing to tolerate two systems provided it did not undermine one country. But this is precisely what the demonstrators, particularly those who have resorted to violence in defiance of the law, are now doing.

Beijing will not act precipitously. It has bigger and more immediate domestic problems to deal with, all of which have been exacerbated by the trade war with the US. Beijing can wait. After all, where is Hong Kong going? Where can it go? And which foreign country will offer more than token or rhetorical support to the demonstrators? The answer to these questions is nowhere and no one.

The Hong Kong people are used to thinking of themselves as the centre of their own universe, a delusion perhaps inherited from the British. But what the demonstrators have failed to understand is that Hong Kong is no longer unique.

. . .

The West generally sees the issue as the Hong Kong people demanding more rights and democracy. Typical was the headline of an article in The New York Times on July 8, “Hong Kong Protestors Are Fuelled by a Broader Demand: More Democracy”.

Perhaps they do want more democracy. I applaud the idealism and courage of the young demonstrators; I doubt their common sense.

For 155 years from 1842 to the handover in 1997, London ruled Hong Kong as a colony, not a democracy; the people of Hong Kong were subjects, not citizens. It was only on the very deathbed of colonial rule that Britain found religion and raised political expectations that no Hong Kong government can fulfil.

The people of Hong Kong are now citizens – of China. The rights they enjoyed as a British colony were not very different from what they were granted under one country, two systems and substantially more than those enjoyed by other citizens of China. It will not get any better.

What Hong Kong really needs is not more democracy but better governance. Good governance requires political representation, but the terms are not synonyms.

 

Edited July 14, 2019 by Randy W (see edit history)

[Randy W]

from the Shanghaiist

 

Hong Kong Chief Executive Carrie Lam wants to resign but Beijing won’t let her

 

Nobody else wants her job

 

 

“I have already announced that work on the bill stopped a month ago on June 15… I know that our responses may not fully satisfy those who voicing these demands but this is not my personal problem.”

 

[Allon]

It is not surprising the reaction and feelings of the Chinese people in general. Call them the Bell Curve as if the CCP had any concept of polling the view of its citizens.

 

The wife and I only briefly discussed the issue of Hong Kong. It ended when she likened it to Taiwan. She says, They are Same.

 

You can't argue that only because you can't argue it. Or rather, she won't argue it. One sure thing is the CCP has indoctrinated their citizens well on the subject of Chinese (revisionist) history. The CCP rules the roost in education.

 

In her history class, I asked if there was any vigorous discussion of how Hong Kong got to be British, and how Taiwan got to be Kuomintang. She says, of course. Not that anyone questioned but was anyone allowed to really question what the teacher/professor taught. "Of course, you don't disagree with the teacher. That is why they are the teacher."

 

I see.

 

I know we in the US have gone through tumultuous times. I don't know how we lived through the 60's. Millenials have nothing on those times. I am glad we had them though. It shows we have differences of opinion that can be discussed and from that, a better world view.

 

The Chinese seem to have a chip on their shoulder about how history has treated them. Can't say that I blame them but they are the ones who profited going back to the days of the Silk Road, and that is quite a long time ago. Those were the days of the Khans and feuding among the provinces. China did not form into a "unified" country until the late 1800's (despite all the "dynasties" which really only describes a province or two) and then with the Qing dynasty, began the slide to communist rule.

 

Taiwan had been occupied by the natives there for over a thousand years. Then the Portuguese and Dutch took over until one Chinese emperor occupied Taiwan/Formosa for 212 years. Then until 1945, when the Kuomintang occupied Formosa, it fell into many hands. Mainland China's only involvement was to send Han Chinese from Fuxian and the interior near there, to Formosa as immigrants escaping from Mao's rule.

 

So Hong Kong is not Taiwan. Hong Kong did not become the financial city it is today until the British occupied it after the opium wars. They also established the elements of a democracy despite the charge of being a colonial power.

 

To say that things will never change is to ignore what has happened over many years -- of change.

 

 

https://www.thoughtco.com/china-lease-hong-kong-to-britain-195153

[Randy W]

 

 

. . .

 

 

 

https://www.thoughtco.com/china-lease-hong-kong-to-britain-195153

 

 

A correction from Wikipedia - Hong Kong was not LEASED, it was ceded outright to Great Britain. The 99 year lease came with the New Territories

 

 

The colonial period began with the occupation of Hong Kong Island in 1841 during the First Opium War. The island was ceded by Qing dynasty in the aftermath of the war in 1842 and established as a Crown colony in 1843. The colony expanded to the Kowloon Peninsula in 1860 after the Second Opium War and was further extended when Britain obtained a 99-year lease of the New Territories in 1898.

Although Hong Kong Island and Kowloon were ceded in perpetuity, the leased area comprised 92 per cent of the territory and Britain considered that there was no viable way to divide the now single colony, while the Chinese Communist Party would not consider extending the lease or allowing British administration thereafter. Britain eventually agreed to transfer the entire colony to China upon the expiration of that lease in 1997 after obtaining guarantees to preserve its systems, freedoms, and way of life for at least 50 years.

 

 

[Allon]

Britain had no choice so whether HK was leased or not is of little consequence. If they kept HK without the surrounding area, HK would be untenable and China would just overrun the city eventually, or there would be constant conflict as a result of the drug wars. The Boxer rebellion is still alive, as Randy's articles clearly show, even to T-Square. It made sense to cede the entire area to China after 50 years and be done with them. Instituting democracy in the area was the "gift" Britain made to China. Such a gift sticks in their craw.....

[Randy W]

Involvement of Chinese law enforcement is still forbidden by the Basic Law

National laws shall not be applied in Hong Kong unless listed in Annex III and applied locally by promulgation or legislation.

The Basic Law can be interpreted by Hong Kong courts in the course of adjudication and by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC), a political parliamentary institution. As of 7 November 2016, the NPCSC has interpreted the Basic Law on five occasions.

Chinese law does not apply and Chinese officials cannot interfere in local affairs.

No department of the Central People's Government and no province, autonomous region, or municipality directly under the Central Government may interfere in the affairs which the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region administers on its own in accordance with this Law.

 

 

from the Global Times

Restricting HK police damages rule of law

 

An essential cause of Hong Kong's chaos lies in the greatly limited police power. The police's duty is to uphold law and order and to deal firmly with offenders. But since June, some violent demonstrators have started to throw stones at police officers. The police officers who attempted to control the situation, however, have been accused by some in Hong Kong of "abusing violence." In the past month or so, charges against the police of "resorting to violence" have even been more than that against the rioters.

The Western public opinion's support for extreme opposition and the fermentation of social media have placed tremendous pressure on the Hong Kong police.

. . .

Hong Kong has long taken the rule of law as its core value. But politics is now above the rule of law. Some unlawful acts, including attacking police and smashing government agencies, were conducted in the name of "pursuing democracy," winning people's sympathy and tolerance. And the actions the police took to stop such crimes have become a risk on the political level.

The rule of law is no longer considered a core, and the value judgment is above the rule of law. The police are the fundamental and most significant tool of the rule of law. If the rule of law is taken as the core, the police would be powerful. If value judgment impacted by politics becomes prominent, violent demonstrators would be even stronger than the police.

. . .

Hong Kong society must restore the authority of the police, lifting all the restrictions and harassment on law enforcement. Police must only recognize law, not political correctness. People who violate the law must be dealt with, regardless of their political pursuit.

 

 

 

Perhaps giving the people a political voice would help.

[Randy W]

from the Singapore Times, via the SCMP

 

"Leslie Fong is a former editor of Singapore’s The Straits Times"

 

 

Why Macau has been spared from the political turmoil now gripping Hong Kong

 

• Macau residents have fully embraced ‘one country, two systems’ and its economy is doing better than Hong Kong’s

 

 

But who are they to cast aspersions against a people who, it can be argued, have chosen to accept that Macau had been a part of China until the Portuguese came in 1557 and will remain so! People of Macau recognise that geography is destiny, even if some or many in Hong Kong refuse to.

Macau residents have worked out a modus vivendi with Beijing. They do not harp only on two systems, as most in Hong Kong do, but embrace one country in word and deed as well.

 

They have no qualms about singing the Chinese national anthem and speaking Mandarin. They do not accept the tourist dollars of mainland visitors in one breath and in the very next, spit on them as locusts.

. . .

Indeed, Macau residents have less reason to feel bitter or frustrated, if per capita GDP, not the best of indicators admittedly, is any gauge. According to International Monetary Fund figures, it was US$122,489 in 2017, the second highest in the world after Qatar’s US$128,702.

. . .

In 1985, then British Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd learned that Portugal, wanting to do the honourable thing by its subjects in Macau before returning sovereignty to China, was contemplating granting full Portuguese citizenship to all born there before November 20, 1981.

He immediately ordered his officials to pressure Lisbon to drop the idea. Reason? He did not want people in Hong Kong to demand similar treatment from Britain later on. To Portugal’s credit, it ignored London and went ahead to accord citizens’ rights to some 85,000 Macau residents who qualified.

Clearly British politicians like Chris Patten forgot this episode, or chose not to remember, when they waxed lyrical about their moral duty to look out for those in Hong Kong who yearned to live free.

 

[Randy W]

My big surprise in all this is that the people of Hong Kong are so decidedly anti-Beijing, while their government is so dominantly pro-Beijing (apparently by design).

Carrie Lam is squarely in the crosshairs from both sides

 

 

Tear gas fired in Kwai Fong station: Hong Kong police told by MTR Corporation to think of public safety after unprecedented indoor deployment during protest

 

Rail bosses call on police to consider welfare of passengers and staff when mounting operations inside MTR network

 

Doctors fear the injured woman could lose her right eye after she was said to be hit with beanbag round fired by police during Sunday’s clashes.

In Hong Kong, neither Beijing nor pro-establishment politicians are even pretending Carrie Lam is still in charge

• Beijing insists on loyalty to Carrie Lam but issues direct messages to the Hong Kong police and pro-Beijing politicians. Add Lam’s public absences, and the demise of ‘one country, two systems’ may be unfolding differently than expected

 

 

 

Over the past two weeks, it is obvious that Beijing has gone from quiet observer to assertive commander. The question, of course, is whether that actually helps in defusing “the most serious situation” since Hong Kong’s handover, in the words of Zhang Xiaoming, head of the Hong Kong and Macau Affairs Office of the State Council.

 

The two HKMAO press conferences and last week’s seminar, in which 500 business and political elites crossed the border en mass to meet in Shenzhen, reveal that Beijing’s support comes at a hefty price.

 

. . .

 

Never mind, of course, that Lam and her administration came out of their two-week absence with an utterly pointless press conference, where the only bit of news was Lam basically declaring herself a security risk and persona non grata. The 500 elites were ordered like rank and file to support Lam, a chief executive who has resorted to having her office release photos of her working and visiting places (à la North Korea), including a wet market, a park and police station.

 

Edited August 12, 2019 by Randy W (see edit history)

[Randy W]

If you're wondering how the Macanese view all this . . .

from the SCMP (the article seems to me to have deformed formatting, but readable)
Edit: They apparently fixed it


How the Hong Kong protests inspire Macau’s youth – and teach their government to be wary


Youngsters from Macau are drawn to the demonstrations as their more conservative society lacks an avenue for them to express political views
The local government has also drawn its lessons from the movement, and is avoiding controversial measures that could cause unrest

While Macau’s youth are not as politically engaged as their counterparts in Hong Kong, a small but increasingly vocal group of youngsters are seeing the protests as a stage to express their grievances and fight for a common cause.

. . .

The media landscape in Macau is much less vibrant than Hong Kong, with the local government having greater financial control over news outlets. The local Portuguese- and English-language media usually feature more critical views of the government – but these often do not reach the majority of the population, who primarily speak Cantonese or Mandarin.

Still, Wong says the protests are touching the hearts of youngsters in Macau.

“Hong Kong values are being introduced in Macau. The young people feel for Hong Kong and that will probably make them more politically engaged,” he says. “I see many friends, who previously showed no interest in politics, sharing news about Hong Kong. But many who care about what is happening have decided to remain quiet.”

[Randy W]

British consulate trade officer detained - from the SCMP

China confirms detention of British consulate trade officer Simon Cheng Man-kit for 15 days

Foreign ministry says Simon Cheng held over violation of public security regulations

 

Quote

Ministry spokesman Geng Shuang said Simon Cheng Man-kit, a trade and investment officer at the Scottish Development International section of the British consulate in Hong Kong, was detained over a violation of the law.

 

“My understanding ... about this person is that Shenzhen police ordered him to serve 15 days of administrative detention for violating public security management regulations,” Geng said, without giving further details.

 

“I also want to stress that this worker is a Hong Kong citizen – not a British citizen – and he is Chinese. And this is entirely an internal matter of China.”

 

Edited June 25, 2021 by Randy W (see edit history)

[Randy W]

Beijing is simply giving them more of what they're protesting about. From the SCMP

 

Beijing’s tougher stance on Hong Kong’s unrest is damaging big business and the free-market economy

• Property developers in Hong Kong have been pressured into showing support for the government and police, and Beijing is moving against Cathay Pacific. This might be the end of the freewheeling free-market Hong Kong that we know

At her press conferences about the unrest, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor is always talking about the rule of law and the economy. Isn’t she aware that she is the one who has damaged the city’s rule of law and free-market economy with her arrogance?

At the rate she is going, Hong Kong will never return to its golden age. We can only hope the wrecking ball won’t knock us down too soon.

 

 

[Greg.D.]

What a revolting piece of propaganda.

[Randy W]

The lady at the center of the whole thing

 

The New York Times

Published on Aug 5, 2019

SUBSCRIBE 2.1M

 

Carrie Lam, Hong Kong’s chief executive, has earned a reputation as a tenacious politician in her nearly 40 years in government. But her close ties with China’s central leadership have made her a divisive figure at home.

 

 

 

[Randy W]

A piece from the human interest angle. Hong Kong has basically three factions - pro-Beijing, business, and rank-and-file Hong Kongers. The pro-Beijing and business people are well represented in the Hong Kong government - the rank-and-file is not.

 

from the SCMP. This attempts to explain the gulf.

 

Can Hongkongers be made to love China? Probably not, but that hasn’t stopped Beijing or the Hong Kong government from trying

• The Hong Kong government have tried forcing through national education, an anthem law and now an extradition bill. Maybe, instead of asking why Hongkongers don’t love China, they should ask whether love is something that can be forced

In 2012, the Hong Kong government sought to introduce Chinese civic education into its public school curriculum as an attempt to inculcate love and respect in Hong Kong youth for their “motherland”. The pro-China curriculum included statements that lauded China’s ruling party and criticised multiparty systems, while making no mention of major events in China’s history, like the Tiananmen massacre.

Amid massive protests, the plan was shelved. More recently, the government has set out to implement a national anthem law, making it a crime to disrespect the Chinese anthem (for example, by parodying it), or not to stand solemnly when it is being played in public. In the name of patriotism, freedom of speech – the foundation of civil society – was disregarded.

China might have been able to earn Hongkongers’ respect if it had honoured the rule of law and its handover agreement with Britain. In time, respect might have blossomed into love. But calling the Sino-British agreement void and repeated attempts to compel love from Hongkongers has only led to resentment and hate.

Unfortunately, the government has not learned from its mistakes. During a televised interview on June 12, immediately after Hong Kong police had used violence against largely peaceful protesters, Chief Executive Carrie Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor used a mother-child analogy to describe the government’s relationship with the people.