Since Anson Chan (陳方安生) resigned as Hong Kong's chief secretary for administration, two of the three most important departments in Hong Kong's civil service have come to be headed by trusted followers of Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) -- Finan-cial Secretary Antony Leung (粱錦松) and Secretary for Justice Elsie Leung (粱愛詩).
Of these two, Antony Leung was plucked from a private organization -- naturally because of his "patriotic" background -- to fill the position vacated following Donald Tsang's (曾蔭權) promotion to Chief Secretary for Administration. But "patriots" have a common malady, namely the fact that they entertain visions of grandeur. This is the main reason behind all the toadying that goes on in the culture of the Communist Party of China (CPC) where everyone wants to put on a good show for the party and prove that the party has not cultivated them in vain. As for Antony Leung's willingness to give up a high-salary job in order to take up a government post, it is likely there is still some factor of "party discipline" behind this.
Antony Leung seems to have less of a bureaucratic air about him, and has been able to win favor with the media. Maybe it's just that he puts on a better show than the others. It's a pity though, that some of his brave words caused his "patriotism" to surface.
After assuming his new post, he immediately stated that Hong Kong must "surpass Manhattan." Thinking back to the "Great Leap Forward" of 1958, perhaps you'll recall Mao's joke of an appeal to "surpass Britain and catch up to the US." This slogan also makes one think of the bold-sounding catchphrase, "The 21st century is China's century." Of course China and Hong Kong have their own goals to struggle for, but they should first observe the situation, and not indulge in sleepy foolish chatter.
Take for example the "Shanghai-phobia" that has appeared in Hong Kong, reflecting local fears that the territory's status will be stolen by Shanghai. Understanding the current situation, however, would show that while not entirely unfounded, this phobia is just paranoia. Without a doubt, Shanghai does possess all kinds of advantages over Hong Kong, including capital, talent and land, but Shanghai's information channels -- or those of any other Chinese city for that matter -- is now and always has been a lethal shortcoming. One can't help but wonder how the city plans to develop its financial industry while at the same time filtering the latest information through government censors. Can Shanghai become a financial "center" without freedom of information? And this is not to mention the other areas of invasive government intervention.
Thus, Hong Kong needs only to preserve its freedom of information and Shanghai will have great difficulty catching up. Unfortunately, however, the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (SAR) is currently closing ranks with the CPC at an alarming rate, thus reducing its own free space. Take for example media discipline. In their TV news programs, some Hong Kong stations have already to begun to imitate Beijing's CCTV. For example, Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) is no longer being referred to as the "President of the ROC" or of "Taiwan," but instead as just "a Taiwanese leader," in order to avoid letting people get the impression that Taiwan is a "country."
In addition, the SAR frequently blames societal problems on the media and has tried on many occasions to control the media. Of course this is just another example of the Hong Kong government putting on a good show for the CPC. If Hong Kong loses its current liberal advantages and sinks to the status of a city with "Chinese characteristics," of course it will surrender its competitive advantage over Shanghai. Recently, when Chen passed through New York, Mayor Rudolph Giuliani himself called on Chen at the Waldorf Hotel in Lower Man-hattan. Would Tung dare allow Chen to cross the border into Hong Kong -- and then pay Chen a visit? Surpass Manhattan? Time to wake up.
In February of this year, Tung stated that Falun Gung was "more or less an evil cult." But Tung has suddenly raised the group's status on June 14, when he told the legislature that Falun Gung was "without question an evil cult," going on to describe it as a very closely knit organization with abundant financial resources, political in nature, and that it had harmed many families in China.
If, however, this is the standard criteria for an "evil cult," then from every perspective, it's the CPC that is the most evil cult. Tung's opinions caused a backlash in the media. Hong Kong has no laws on evil cults, and thus Tung had used his personal opinion -- in lieu of a court's -- to make a judgement. It's the Hong Kong version of the CPC's "rule by people" (as opposed to the rule of law) and it sets a very bad precedent. And Tung acted thus just so that he could serve as the SAR's chief executive for another term.
Going to such disgusting lengths to curry favor with President Jiang Zemin (
When Tung incurred a whole spate of criticism over his comments, no government official came out in support. Donald Tsang even hurried over to the Foreign Correspondents Club to explain that Tung's statements were merely personal opinion. This clearly showed that the SAR government was worried about any negative impact on foreigners' impressions of Hong Kong. But individuals at the very top of Hong Kong politics aren't supposed to express personal opinions -- much less during a legislative questioning session, the purpose of which is to let legislators understand the government's position on an issue. One can see that Donald Tsang was trying to cover up Tung's blunder. Would this kind of thing happen in Manhattan? Of course not.
Fearing an outflow of foreign capital, Beijing has recently forbidden its citizens from going to Hong Kong to buy or sell stocks. The CPC has begun cracking down on people engaged in illicit currency exchange. Some unlucky travelers at Luohu (羅湖) customs even had to surrender their passports when they tried to exit the country. I've never heard of anything this ridiculous ever happening in Manhattan, let alone anywhere else in the world. Not allowing Chinese citizens to go to Hong Kong to buy or sell stocks will not only make it impossible for the territory to become a Manhattan, but could leave it well behind even Shanghai and Shenzhen. Isn't Beijing singing a different tune to counter the ones sung by Tung and Antony Leung, and take away their podium?
All of these bizarre events are rooted in "one country, two systems." Since the CPC wants to apply the "China way" in Hong Kong, it's useless to talk of "two systems." Further, if Hong Kong is unwilling to close ranks with Beijing, how is "one country" to exist? And if Hong Kong can't even figure out "one country, two systems," why should Taiwan give the idea serious consideration?
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Scudder Smith
Recently, China launched another diplomatic offensive against Taiwan, improperly linking its “one China principle” with UN General Assembly Resolution 2758 to constrain Taiwan’s diplomatic space. After Taiwan’s presidential election on Jan. 13, China persuaded Nauru to sever diplomatic ties with Taiwan. Nauru cited Resolution 2758 in its declaration of the diplomatic break. Subsequently, during the WHO Executive Board meeting that month, Beijing rallied countries including Venezuela, Zimbabwe, Belarus, Egypt, Nicaragua, Sri Lanka, Laos, Russia, Syria and Pakistan to reiterate the “one China principle” in their statements, and assert that “Resolution 2758 has settled the status of Taiwan” to hinder Taiwan’s
Singaporean Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong’s (李顯龍) decision to step down after 19 years and hand power to his deputy, Lawrence Wong (黃循財), on May 15 was expected — though, perhaps, not so soon. Most political analysts had been eyeing an end-of-year handover, to ensure more time for Wong to study and shadow the role, ahead of general elections that must be called by November next year. Wong — who is currently both deputy prime minister and minister of finance — would need a combination of fresh ideas, wisdom and experience as he writes the nation’s next chapter. The world that
The past few months have seen tremendous strides in India’s journey to develop a vibrant semiconductor and electronics ecosystem. The nation’s established prowess in information technology (IT) has earned it much-needed revenue and prestige across the globe. Now, through the convergence of engineering talent, supportive government policies, an expanding market and technologically adaptive entrepreneurship, India is striving to become part of global electronics and semiconductor supply chains. Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s Vision of “Make in India” and “Design in India” has been the guiding force behind the government’s incentive schemes that span skilling, design, fabrication, assembly, testing and packaging, and
Can US dialogue and cooperation with the communist dictatorship in Beijing help avert a Taiwan Strait crisis? Or is US President Joe Biden playing into Chinese President Xi Jinping’s (習近平) hands? With America preoccupied with the wars in Europe and the Middle East, Biden is seeking better relations with Xi’s regime. The goal is to responsibly manage US-China competition and prevent unintended conflict, thereby hoping to create greater space for the two countries to work together in areas where their interests align. The existing wars have already stretched US military resources thin, and the last thing Biden wants is yet another war.