Today, the people of Hong Kong are set to hold the biggest street demonstration since the terri-tory's handover to China in 1997. According to a report in the Hsin Pao newspaper, the government has conducted a survey on the matter. The authorities were shocked to find out that 18 percent of the territory's residents said they would participate in the demonstration.
Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao's (溫家寶) trip to Hong Kong was moved ahead a day in order to avoid the demonstration and the embarrassment. Wen will not get to see the Hong Kong people's anger against Chief Executive Tung Chee-hwa (董建華) and his government. The organizers estimate that 100,000 people will show up for today's demonstration, but the authorities have made preparations for 200,000.
The demonstration is primarily aimed at the legislation mandated by Article 23 of the territory's Basic Law. Tung's government has stubbornly insisted on enacting the law, ignoring the opinions of residents and displaying an extremely thuggish and arrogant attitude. On top of this, the government has -- by its obstinacy and incompetence over the past six years -- caused Hong Kong to sink to the status of the worst-off among the "four Asian dragons."
The political system arranged by China in 1997 ensured that the government can do whatever it wants. The people cannot express their opinions at the ballot box. Some media institutions have also been bought off by China. Having no other choice, the people can only vote with their feet. The US has expressed concern about Hong Kong, but China has invariably rebutted it as "interference in domestic affairs."
Also, some clowns in Hong Kong have ferociously lashed out at the US. Tsang Hin-chi (曾憲梓), a standing committee member of the National People's Congress, warned the US about China's "strength." Martin Lee (李柱銘), the former Democratic Party chairman who has worked to publicize Hong Kong's situation and sought help from the international community, was rebuked by Tung and accused by pro-Communist people of being a collaborator.
The seeds of the Hong Kong people's current predicament were sowed 20 years ago, when China and the UK started negotiations on the territory's future. At the time, the people were deprived of any opportunity to state their opinions. Beijing rejected the participation of residents' representatives in the negotiation, on the grounds that it opposed a "three-legged stool." Nor did Beijing allow the people to express their wishes through a referendum. The so-called "China experts" in Britain dared not oppose Beijing.
As a result, the opinions of the people were ignored. Six million Hong Kong residents were handed over to China's authoritarian regime along with the land. It was a powerful countercurrent against the tide of democracy, followed by an interlude in which China decided to build a nuclear power plant in Daya Bay, which is adjacent to Hong Kong. One million Hong Kong people joined a signature drive to oppose the plant, but Beijing simply ignored it.
No matter how many residents oppose Article 23, the government has always used various despicable ploys to label them a minority opinion. This is because Hong Kong does not have a democratic political system. And of course the government will not allow a referendum on the matter.
Margaret Ng (吳靄儀), a mem-ber of the Legislative Council, asked Tung: How many residents will have to take to the streets to make him stop the legislation? Tung refused to answer the question -- what is he going to do if the number he mentions actually takes to the streets?
But don't expect the authorities to stop the legislation even if 1 million people take to the streets. It may even suppress the opposition harder. But if the people of Hong Kong do not rise and protest, they will lose all opportunities to make improvements and allow themselves to be trampled upon at will.
This reminds one of the referendum issue in Taiwan. If the people of Taiwan are deprived of their rights because of China's opposition, then their nation's destiny will be just like Hong Kong's. Ultimately, not only major public policies but Taiwan's very future could be determined through referendums. No one must be allowed to depict referendums as solely concerned with "Taiwan independence."
According to some opinion polls, a majority of the public supports the pan-blue camp. In that case, unification with China may also have the support of the majority of the people. By opposing referendums, Beijing is opposing a model of democracy, not Taiwan's independence. It is concerned that referendums in Taiwan may stimulate the Chinese public's demands for democracy. This is why Beijing is opposing even referendums on public policies that do not involve Taiwan's future status.
In fact, Taiwan's presidential elections, the first of which was held in 1996, have some characteristics of a referendum -- with each person casting one vote. That was why Beijing fired missiles to oppose the democratic elections. If Taiwanese fears of rising tensions in the Taiwan Strait had been justifiable, then they should have canceled the 1996 presidential elections. Otherwise, why oppose a referendum now?
The US has expressed "concern" because it now needs China's help in the war against terrorism. The US is not opposing the people's basic rights. In light of the Chinese government's thuggish behavior, Taiwan absolutely must not give up on this principle. But it should also maintain necessary coordination with the US.
Referendums can be held on any appropriate issue at any appropriate time. Let Beijing get used to them, just like it's gotten used to Taiwan's democratic elections.
Paul Lin is a political commentator based in New York.
Translated by Francis Huang
For the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), China’s “century of humiliation” is the gift that keeps on giving. Beijing returns again and again to the theme of Western imperialism, oppression and exploitation to keep stoking the embers of grievance and resentment against the West, and especially the US. However, the People’s Republic of China (PRC) that in 1949 announced it had “stood up” soon made clear what that would mean for Chinese and the world — and it was not an agenda that would engender pride among ordinary Chinese, or peace of mind in the international community. At home, Mao Zedong (毛澤東) launched
The restructuring of supply chains, particularly in the semiconductor industry, was an essential part of discussions last week between Taiwan and a US delegation led by US Undersecretary of State for Economic Growth, Energy and the Environment Keith Krach. It took precedent over the highly anticipated subject of bilateral trade partnerships, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co (TSMC) founder Morris Chang’s (張忠謀) appearance on Friday at a dinner hosted by President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) for Krach was a subtle indicator of this. Chang was in photographs posted by Tsai on Facebook after the dinner, but no details about their discussions were disclosed. With
There are worrying signs that China is on the brink of a major food shortage, which might trigger a strategic contest over food security and push Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平), already under intense pressure, toward drastic measures, potentially spelling trouble for Taiwan and the rest of the world. China has encountered a perfect storm of disasters this year. On top of disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic, torrential rains have caused catastrophic flooding in the Yangtze River basin, China’s largest agricultural region. Floodwaters are estimated to have already destroyed the crops on 6 million hectares of farmland. The situation has been
On Sept. 8, at the high-profile Ketagalan security forum, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) urged countries to deal with the China challenge. She said: “It is time for like-minded countries, and democratic friends in the Indo-Pacific region and beyond, to discuss a framework to generate sustained and concerted efforts to maintain a strategic order that deters unilateral aggressive actions.” The “Taiwan model” to deal with the COVID-19 pandemic provides an alternative to China’s authoritarian way of handling it. Taiwan’s response to the health crisis has made it evident that countries across the world have much to learn from Taiwan’s best practices and if