Today Hong Kong's chief executive, Tung Chee-hwa (
It is interesting to examine the reasons for the change. The primary one seems to be that by removing civil servants from the forging of policy and confining their role to its implementation, only the government will thereby safeguard administrative neutrality, protect civil servants from political pressure and make policymakers themselves more accountable for their actions.
This is of course nonsense. The 14 "ministers" are accountable to nobody except Tung himself. Neither Hong Kong's people nor its legislature had any say in their appointment. What in fact the move does is to take policymaking out of the hands of professional civil servants whose jobs are protected in such a way as that they can say no to Tung, and put it in the hands of Tung cronies. This will certainly strengthen the position of the thoroughly disliked Tung over the territory's government.
As a "reform" it simply makes a mockery of the word. It is simply a plan to pull the teeth of the civil service, which has been protective of the independence and professionalism it had under British rule and has been slow to dance to Beijing's tune. The undermining and eventual destruction of Anson Chan (
Delights in store for the people of Hong Kong over the next five years include new laws on secession and subversion, and the banning of local political groups from contact with foreign organizations. Chinese Vice Premier Qian Qichen (
Much of the commentary concerning this melancholy anniversary has been along the lines of "it could have been a lot worse." Maybe, but not without seriously damaging Hong Kong economically. The territory is being run by an unelected clique of tycoons without a shred of accountability to anyone except their equally unelected political masters in Beijing. The system is actually less accountable now than it was under British colonial rule.
How is this going to appeal to the people of Taiwan? We ask this question because, of course, Hong Kong was supposed to be the showcase that proved that "one country, two systems" was viable. The lesson that watching five years of Chinese rule of Hong Kong has taught us is that Beijing will immediately dissolve your legislature and reelect it on a limited franchise calculated to produce "acceptable" results. It will then impose upon you a leader you did not choose, who will surround himself with toadies and cronies that cannot be removed except on his say so. It will insist that you pass laws limiting freedom of speech and criminalizing some areas of legitimate political discussion -- the question of secession, for example -- and give its favored cronies like Sally Aw immunity from prosecution.
Does this sound like anything? To us it sounds like the detestable KMT regime of the Chiangs of infamous memory. It has taken us a decade and a half of effort to consign that to history. Why would we want to live with it again?
Two sets of economic data released last week by the Directorate-General of Budget, Accounting and Statistics (DGBAS) have drawn mixed reactions from the public: One on the nation’s economic performance in the first quarter of the year and the other on Taiwan’s household wealth distribution in 2021. GDP growth for the first quarter was faster than expected, at 6.51 percent year-on-year, an acceleration from the previous quarter’s 4.93 percent and higher than the agency’s February estimate of 5.92 percent. It was also the highest growth since the second quarter of 2021, when the economy expanded 8.07 percent, DGBAS data showed. The growth
In the intricate ballet of geopolitics, names signify more than mere identification: They embody history, culture and sovereignty. The recent decision by China to refer to Arunachal Pradesh as “Tsang Nan” or South Tibet, and to rename Tibet as “Xizang,” is a strategic move that extends beyond cartography into the realm of diplomatic signaling. This op-ed explores the implications of these actions and India’s potential response. Names are potent symbols in international relations, encapsulating the essence of a nation’s stance on territorial disputes. China’s choice to rename regions within Indian territory is not merely a linguistic exercise, but a symbolic assertion
At the same time as more than 30 military aircraft were detected near Taiwan — one of the highest daily incursions this year — with some flying as close as 37 nautical miles (69kms) from the northern city of Keelung, China announced a limited and selected relaxation of restrictions on Taiwanese agricultural exports and tourism, upon receiving a Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) delegation led by KMT legislative caucus whip Fu Kun-chi (傅崑萁). This demonstrates the two-faced gimmick of China’s “united front” strategy. Despite the strongest earthquake to hit the nation in 25 years striking Hualien on April 3, which caused
In the 2022 book Danger Zone: The Coming Conflict with China, academics Hal Brands and Michael Beckley warned, against conventional wisdom, that it was not a rising China that the US and its allies had to fear, but a declining China. This is because “peaking powers” — nations at the peak of their relative power and staring over the precipice of decline — are particularly dangerous, as they might believe they only have a narrow window of opportunity to grab what they can before decline sets in, they said. The tailwinds that propelled China’s spectacular economic rise over the past